Why Krishna Only?

[guliaditya]

I would request Loverofthebhagavataji & dark warriorji to have peace of mind & don't fight with each other.

The thread started with the topic"Why Krishna only"

 

Ekam sastram devaki-putra-gitam

Eko devo devaki-putra eva

Eko mantras tasya namani yani

Karmapy ekam tasya devasya seva(Gita Mahtmya-5)

 

That shastra which speak of Devaki putra is the only shastra,Only one God i.e Lord Narayana/Krishna,Only one mantra i.e chanting Divine names of Lord Narayana,Only one work i.e seva of Lord Narayana & his divine bhaktaas.

 

This he conclusion of all the scriptures & all acharyas.

This verse was told by Lord Shiva himself hence there should not be any question of authenticity also.

 

Pranaam

 

 

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

I would request Loverofthebhagavataji & dark warriorji to have peace of mind & don't fight with each other.

The thread started with the topic"Why Krishna only"

 

You're right, my friend. However, he keeps slandering everyone who differ from him with the basest adjectives and expletives. Someone has to give that idiot a taste of his own medicine. Anyways, I'm outta here. Let Dark Warrior read his own replies.

[bija]

Prabhu's talking about all things IQ and brain damage. Fourteen years ago I had a very serious illness, and was close to leaving the body. Doctors performed an IQ test on me to see if I had brain damage. The illness I had kills one in four people.

 

At the time of the IQ test my brother came to visit me in hospital, months later he expressed he did not know whether I was conscious of my surroundings. It was pretty hard going internally at the time, believe me, the body was closing down, and my mind was on some other plane of awareness.

 

Anyhow they did the IQ test to see if I was 'brain damaged' (to use a loose term from this current discussion thread). I scored 110. Whetever that means to the braniacs. I guess exercicing the brain could produce a higher score. But it depends where one's motivations lie ofcourse.

 

Thank God for the restorative function of mind and body, maybe oneday it will catch up with the pristine nature of the soul, who we truly are.

[Dark Warrior]

 

That is exactly what this pathetic believer with his subhuman intelligence means. He thinks that he is the only one who is familiar with the customary Hindu rhetoric with regards to academic studies of Indian religions. The amusing thing is, he takes himself seriously and considers that the rest of us should bow down to his ridiculous mythologies. What a sad, semi-literate git! I'm off talking with this gibbon. I'd give birth before being able to make this ape view things sans his sectarian lenses! Taraar!

 

Runt, Whatever credibility you had, is no longer left. The fact is, I have systematically provided refutations of your pathetic opinions, and you don't have the guts to respond. Then, you criticise my knowledge ofr 'indian religions'.

 

Moron, you do not even know how Hari Supremacy is proven in the Vedas. You keep harping about indologists, when you lack a basic knowledge of their techniques. You have studied Gaudiya Vaishnavism, but do not know anything about Vaishnavism itself.

 

Max Muller's translations are contradictory, whereas true Vedantins see no contradictions. Yet, you think the former's opinions are right. that shows you have the IQ of a rat.

 

Its because of these brainless morons that Hinduism is portrayed in a bad light.

 

Now go suck up to your Max Muller's translations of the Vedas, and stop whining like a pig.

 

EDIT: Oh I see. So now, our culture is senseless mythology? Hmm, let's see, these 'senseless' mythologies illustrate the Lord's accessibility more clearly than any religion can. These 'myths' have great and deep meanings of atman and brahman, with invaluable spirituality. So, they are now just kiddish?

 

Oh dear, you are certainly entertaining. Keep this up.

 

DOUBLE EDIT:

Where did I say you were a GV? Funny how idiotic you are, you BELIEVER, HEHEHE

 

I had to reply to this. If you knew I was not a GV, then why did you blabber about having studied GV for years and bring up the myth that 'all' Vaishnavas accept Gopala Tapani?

 

You contradict your own brain.

[kimfelix]

Dark Warrior, do you have a reference for the quotation from the Maha Narayana Upanishad?

 

By the way, the instruction to 'Back off' sometimes implies a sort of threat but I am sure you didn't mean it like that. Word to the wise.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

The fact is, I have systematically provided refutations of your pathetic opinions, and you don't have the guts to respond. Then, you criticise my knowledge ofr 'indian religions'.

 

 

The same refutations that you're the only one to take seriously, eh? Get a life, moron, only you take yourself seriously. Ciao, pigheaded ass! Then, I have to go lenient on you, after all, you have an IQ score of 65 - 65 it was, right?

[Malati dasi]

Radhe Radhe

 

I agree with Dark warrior. With regards to the Vedas I don't trust scholars especially western scholars. The Vedas should be translated and commented upon with a blend of literal accurancy, cultural and religious insight. Otherwise it's just a barren literature.

And what's wrong with interpolation? We can make reasonable conclusions from that method.

About Vaishnavism syncretic approach, if a "personal God" is real, then there must be a thread that should run across the spectrum of the Vedas, isn’t it?

Lastly, Im annoyed at how this discussions have gone to the level of childish name calling. LOB, I think it was you who started to behave appallingly. Please don't go that low!

Loverofthe bhagavat, you will sound you lost in the debate if you parade your IQ to make it appear that you are more superior than Dark Warrior.

btw, my sons and my ex-husband are Mensa members but we don’t ram their IQs into anyone’s faces.

 

Bija, depends on what test was used on you, eg. Stannford Binett and another one w/c I can't remember at the moment, 100 or110 is average.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

LOB, I think it was you who started to behave appalling. Please don't go that low!

Loverofthe bhagavat, you will sound you lost in the debate if you parade your IQ to make it appear that you are more superior than Dark Warrior.

btw, I my sons and my ex-husband are Mensa members but we don’t ram their IQs into anyone’s faces.

 

 

Then may you please tell me where I started behaving appallingly with Mr. Good Manners Dark Warrior. Then again, considering than I'm not a Vaishnava, I have to be the bad one, isn't it?

 

When someone begins to call you stupid, moronic, idiotic and so forth repeatedly, it is all too fair to put them in their proper place. But knowing you, Malati, and what many others think of you, I'm not surprised by your post. Just refrain from addressing yourself to me henceforth. I don't assign much importance to your opinion/s. Just ignore my postings as well.

[bija]

Bija, depends on what test was used on you, eg. Stannford Binett and another one w/c I can't remember at the moment, 100 or110 is average. by malati mataji

lol average:) sounds right to me

[Dark Warrior]

 

The same refutations that you're the only one to take seriously, eh? Get a life, moron, only you take yourself seriously. Ciao, pigheaded ass! Then, I have to go lenient on you, after all, you have an IQ score of 65 - 65 it was, right?

LMAO. What a moron.

 

I am the only one who took it seriously? Every Vaishnava, and those who refuted it, along with all Hindus take it seriously.

 

You are really an idiot.

 

 

Then may you please tell me where I started behaving appallingly with Mr. Good Manners Dark Warrior. Then again, considering than I'm not a Vaishnava, I have to be the bad one, isn't it?

 

When someone begins to call you stupid, moronic, idiotic and so forth repeatedly, it is all too fair to put them in their proper place. But knowing you, Malati, and what many others think of you, I'm not surprised by your post. Just refrain from addressing yourself to me henceforth. I don't assign much importance to your opinion/s. Just ignore my postings as well.

 

 

Are you implying that we take these western indologists suggestions that the Vedas pertain to a war over skin color (Indra vs. Dasyus) whereas our acharyas see deep spiritual meanings?

 

Have you lost all your common sense to suggest that your 'rational scholars' are actually unopposed?

 

Do you think Vaishnavism is not based on sastra, when we have defeated Saivites, Advaitins and pig headed moronic hindus like you?

 

Stupidity has reached new heights here.

[bija]

Isn't Krishna one of the gods in the vedic pantheon> Why do some people advocate exclusive worship to him, and ignore other gods? my firstpost here, so I am a little confused. thanks. quote by sandra

Here is a flow of Bhagavad Gita verses, the words of Sri Krsna. This should give you some insight to the thought of those who exclusively worship Sri Krsna. Ignoring other God's is not correct understanding in this school of thought by the way. The below verses will give you an idea why that is so.

 

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/19/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/20/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/21/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/22/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/23/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/24/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/25/en

http://vedabase.net/bg/9/26/en

There are many deeper reasons why devotees have exclusive attraction to Sri Krsna, but that is a very elaborate internal subject matter, the science of love. Which is a very personal encounter. You can find the literature dealing with that subject here: http://nitaaiveda.com/All_Scriptures_By_Acharyas.htm

 

Sandra if you have the time and are serious about an answer to your questions here is a very good book,

saturated in love for Sri Krsna. It explains an answer to your question. Sanatana was one of the followers of Sri Caitanya who previously served a muslim government. It's a good read this:), the devotee of Sri Krsna can experience much bliss reading such books:

http://nitaaiveda.com/All_Scriptures_By_Acharyas/Sanatana_Goswami/Brihad_Bhagavatamrita.htm

 

 

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

As I said, that is all that can be expected from a moron with an IQ of 65!

 

You display your stupidity by implying that I meant that the opinions of Vaishnavas are any different from yours. Clearly, I was inferring that your position reflects the mainstream mythological view and that no rationalist can buy that seriously. Ramanuja, Madhva and all others can shove it up theirs. I don't give a toss about their rubbish.

 

Just sod off, moron. Given that you cannot even comprehend English properly, you're not worth replying to anymore. Farewell. Expect no further responses! LOSER!!!

 

By the way, I'm putting you on my ignore list, stinking little Hindu apologist that you are!

[Dark Warrior]

 

As I said, that is all that can be expected from a moron with an IQ of 65!

 

You display your stupidity by implying that I meant that the opinions of Vaishnavas are any different from yours. Clearly, I was inferring that your position reflects the mainstream mythological view and that no rationalist can buy that seriously. Ramanuja, Madhva and all others can shove it up theirs. I don't give a toss about their rubbish.

 

Just sod off, moron. Given that you cannot even comprehend English properly, you're not worth replying to anymore. Farewell. Expect no further responses! LOSER!!!

 

Of course, if you come on to a Vaishnava forum, then everyone will talk about Sri Krishna's historicity. If you wanted to call it mythology, then go to an islamic or christian forum.

 

And what retarded logic. Of course, non-hindus won't believe it. If you are not a hindu, then of course you won't believe it. but does that mean you are right? Nope. Your idiotic views have been refuted.

 

Your rationalist view is that Max Muller's translations and his dating of the Vedas are right, when he completely ignores the astronomical proof in the scripture itself.

 

Your western scholars are not 'rational'. Every step of their methodology is questionable. Even Max Muller admitted that his dates for the Upanishads are totally unfounded and arbitrary.

 

Your belief in these clowns is itself contradictory to rationality.

 

And disrespecting acharyas clearly proves that you are nothing higher than a little bogey to be flushed away down the drain.

 

 

By the way, I'm putting you on my ignore list, stinking little Hindu apologist that you are!

 

<!-- / message -->Oh my goodness gracious, I am devastated that a pea brain who has no clue of our sampradaya is putting me on the ignore list! Tr000ly, I am finished!!

 

Get your sorry carcass out of here until you learn to respect great sages like Sri Ramanujar and Sri Madhvar.<!-- sig -->

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

Keep screwing yourself, you sad git. I'm not even reading your nonsensical claptrap anymore, since you're from now on ignored by me. If other people are sensible as well, they will put you on their lists just the way I did. Just go suck up to Ramanuja's mummy, you sorry donkey!

[Dark Warrior]

 

Keep screwing yourself, you sad git. I'm not even reading your nonsensical claptrap anymore, since you're from now on ignored by me. If other people are sensible as well, they will put you on their lists just the way I did. Just go suck up to Ramanuja's mummy, you sorry donkey!

 

Then, your stupidity is completely revealed here. Coming to a Vaishnava forum to argue that Sri Krishna doesn't exist? What a moron.

 

Not only are you an idiot, but a blasphemous idiot. No wonder you have been blasted by even that Tackleberry character.

 

You have no knowledge of our sampradaya. You have no knowledge of our sacred texts. You know nothing about the glorious meanings of our scripture. You have no idea of the Kalyana gunas of the Lord. You are a pathetic, useless, piece of trash who can't post without contradictions.

 

Learn to argue first, then come. Your disrespect for acharyas is nothing more than bad karma.

[Malati dasi]

This is going to be my last post in this embarassing turn of dicussions here.

 

LOB, It DOES NOT BOTHER me what people think of me! I am who I am!

 

Just backtrack on this thread and you will see it was you who started about about this mental measurement stuff, so what can you expect from dark warrior. I can't believe that a very intelligent person like you would have a collection of such expletives. Sorry

 

Hare Krishna

[Dark Warrior]

Who said Bhagavatalover was intelligent anyway? At best, it can be said that he/she is an educated chimp, in the sense that his/her posts are absolute nonsense with perfect grammar.

[LoveroftheBhagavata]

 

Just backtrack on this thread and you will see it was you who started about about this mental measurement stuff, so what can you expect from dark warrior. I can't believe that a very intelligent person like you would have a collection of such expletives. Sorry

 

Dark Warrior is on my ignore list, he can blather foolishly all he wants, it's all water on a duck's back to me. Malati, I suppose that I'm the one who initiated the name-calling too, eh?

[sandrajenkins]

 

Isn't Krishna one of the gods in the vedic pantheon> Why do some people advocate exclusive worship to him, and ignore other gods? my firstpost here, so I am a little confused. thanks. quote by sandra

Here is a flow of Bhagavad Gita verses, the words of Sri Krsna. This should give you some insight to the thought of those who exclusively worship Sri Krsna. Ignoring other God's is not correct understanding in this school of thought by the way. The below verses will give you an idea why that is so.

 

 

 

Oh thanks so much, Bija. So is it reasonable to asumet that other gods are also expandsions of Krishna, and one can worship them, but not exclusively? Is this correct? Reg. Kimfelex's point that ther'es no mention of Krishna in vedas, can a connection be established between vishnu and krusnn a, becauise Vishnu is mentioned in vedas? Is bhagavat the only scripture that mentions this, I mean the avatars.

[Dark Warrior]

 

Dark Warrior is on my ignore list, he can blather foolishly all he wants, it's all water on a duck's back to me. Malati, I suppose that I'm the one who initiated the name-calling too, eh?

 

No problem. Other people can read my insults anyway. Atleast you admit your incapability to argue properly.

 

Keeping silent is the best idea Bhagavatalover ever had.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam All

 

Wow is this Hindu site?

Lighten up guys this is very unlike hindu sahbyata, on this auspicious day of Ram navami, least one can do is be polite to each other.

Differences are healthy and should be respected but to fight over it is no Dharma.

Calling names only reflects on ones own character and above all brings disrepute to what ever one follows.

Jai Sri Ram Jaya Ram Jay Jay Ram.

Jai Shree Sita Ram

[kimfelix]

Avatars are also mentioned in the Mahabharata but not in much detail. The fullest acounts are to be found in the Bhagavata and other Puranas. The Vedic gods are regarded as higher beings of this world, whilst the Supreme Deity, is beyond this world and has absolute power over it. This is why Hindu Dharma can be said to be monotheistic and polytheistic at the same time without contradiction. In the Bhagavad Gita it is revealed that all the lesser gods are empowered by the Supreme Deity and exist as a part of his existence. However, that is not to say that the Vedic gods are on the same level as the Supreme Deity. He is utterly transcendent whilst they are trapped in the cycle of samsara like the rest of us; they have got to the top of the pile but they are still in the pile and will eventually start to come down.

[sandrajenkins]

 

Avatars are also mentioned in the Mahabharata but not in much detail. The fullest acounts are to be found in the Bhagavata and other Puranas. The Vedic gods are regarded as higher beings of this world, whilst the Supreme Deity, is beyond this world and has absolute power over it. This is why Hindu Dharma can be said to be monotheistic and polytheistic at the same time without contradiction. In the Bhagavad Gita it is revealed that all the lesser gods are empowered by the Supreme Deity and exist as a part of his existence. However, that is not to say that the Vedic gods are on the same level as the Supreme Deity. He is utterly transcendent whilst they are trapped in the cycle of samsara like the rest of us; they have got to the top of the pile but they are still in the pile and will eventually start to come down.

 

Thanks, just two questions.

 

Is this Supreme Deity (that you mention) found by name in the veda? I am assuming it's Vishnu, which is why Krishna is also worshipped as Supreme.

Second, are the avatars and lesser deities mentioned in bhagavat or anywhere else by name? Specific names like Shiva, Ganesh and others.

[Kulapavana]

Sandra, Vedic texts are like a thick jungle, even when they are correctly translated. They are spoken by hundreds of voices, each one presenting a particular perspective and vision of the Truth.

 

Do not start your search in the middle of the jungle, because you will get lost. Start with the questions pertaining to the self and see how the Vedas answer these question before you go any further.

 

Is Vishnu the supreme deity in the Vedas? Read the Purusha-sookta and Hiranyagarbha hymns to find out. The Deity which is the source of the Maha-purusha and the Golden Egg is most certainly supreme, because it is the only one outside these things. All other deities are inside.

[kimfelix]

Sandra, I know others will disagree with me and so what follows is just my own understanding. The Veda consists of a ritual portion, which includes just over 1,000 hymns dedicated to different gods who worshipped in the ritual. The gods who have the most hymns dedicated to them are Indra (about 25%), Agni, Varuna and Soma. These gods are not prominent in contemporary Hindu Dharma. Vishnu and Rudra (Shiva) are also praised by some Vedic hymns but they are not particularly prominent in Veda.

 

The more philosophical portion of the Veda consists of a number of works called Upanishads. These suggest that there is a higher, transcendent reality that even the Vedic gods cannot fully comprehend. The Upanishads refer to it as Brahman and reveal that it is present within every living being as true self, the atman. The Atman is Brahman. Hence you might question whether it is a Deity in the sense of being a personal God as the Upanishads are mainly concerned with knowing Brahman rather than devotion or worship.

 

There are other Sanskrit texts that are outside of the Veda but are still regarded as 'Vedic' and authoritative. These are the Mahabharata, Ramayana, Puranas and especially the Bhagavad Gita. Here we do find an emphasis on a personal Supreme Deity who is named as either Vishnu or Shiva. It was this other strand of Hindu thought I was referring to, although it is not particularly prominent within the Veda itself.