Why Vaishnava & Vaishnav Gods Targeted ?

[Dark Warrior]

I think the thread starter is talking about a new movie being released in the South.

 

The actor in the movie is seen to be making a mockery of Vaishnavism. He also stamps on the Bhagavad Gita and 'OM' symbol, and stands on an idol of Vishnu in the movie.

 

Its definitely distressing, but heck, its Kali Yuga. The Lord never gets angry at offenses done to Him, so He rarely reacts. Only when His devotees are offended, He get angry.

[Amlesh]

 

I think the thread starter is talking about a new movie being released in the South.

 

The actor in the movie is seen to be making a mockery of Vaishnavism. He also stamps on the Bhagavad Gita and 'OM' symbol, and stands on an idol of Vishnu in the movie.

 

Its definitely distressing, but heck, its Kali Yuga. The Lord never gets angry at offenses done to Him, so He rarely reacts. Only when His devotees are offended, He get angry.

 

True.

 

But somehow or the other I got the Luck to watch 1 south indian movie Sri Ramdasu... It deals about a Ram Bhakta.

 

Plz try to watch the movie.

 

And yes, it's true that majority of people nowadays are choosing the darkside, but still there are some who still have higher taste.

[Kulapavana]

 

I downgraded the accusation to offensiveness. Saying he made mistakes on major points of siddhanta is offensive. That is bad enough.

 

He did not make mistakes on major points of siddhanta. He sometimes told some of his disciples that the rope was a snake (as in: "we fell from Vaikuntha"). That approach worked for a lot of people who were too attached to the Abrahamic system of religion.

[cbrahma]

 

He did not make mistakes on major points of siddhanta. He sometimes told some of his disciples that the rope was a snake (as in: "we fell from Vaikuntha"). That approach worked for a lot of people who were too attached to the Abrahamic system of religion.

Yes you question his views of Christianity for one thing and the fall down theory. These are major points.

[Kulapavana]

 

Yes you question his views of Christianity for one thing and the fall down theory. These are major points.

 

Christianity has no place in GV siddhanta. Do you see it addressed by the shastras or 6 Goswamis? And on the fall theory Prabhupada said very clearly: "The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikunthha planet, for it is the eternal abode." (Srimad Bhagavatam, 3.16.26 purport.). But to attract Hare Krishnas like you, he also said that "we all come from Vaikuntha" - another "snake is a rope" trick.

[tackleberry]

 

Where have you been? Yes, the English-educated, crypto-socialist, liberal intelligentsia of India habitually attacks Hindu culture up to and including Lord Vishnu and His devotees. They have been like this for decades. And no, they don't make a special case for iskcon devotees. They hate you just as much as they hate the rest of us.

 

Like nice little subjects of the British crown, they learned their lessons well. Now they teach the very derogatory theories that they themselves were taught. This is the tragedy of imperialism - when a culture becomes enslaved to the ideas of a foreign power who have guns and muscle but no civilization or sophistication.

 

Agreed, but the Brits did what they had to do. As a conquering race, their job was to demoralize the enemy, which they did. Not that it makes it right, but it's *normal* for the conqueror to demoralize the enemy by attacking his culture and so on; it's more or less a war tactic. If not forgivable, at least it's understandable.

 

But what is neither forgivable nor understandable is Indians doing the exact same thing.

[theist]

 

Yes you question his views of Christianity for one thing and the fall down theory. These are major points.

 

Leaving aside the fall theory I find it ludicrous and highly offensive for those that claim to be followers of Prabhupada to deny Prabhupada's clear cut statements on the position of Christ. And then to offer a so-called hidden motive to his statements which is contrary to the statements themselves markes such people as wolves in sheeps clothing to me.

[Beggar]

 

Leaving aside the fall theory I find it ludicrous and highly offensive for those that claim to be followers of Prabhupada to deny Prabhupada's clear cut statements on the position of Christ. And then to offer a so-called hidden motive to his statements which is contrary to the statements themselves markes such people as wolves in sheeps clothing to me.

 

Are Srila Prabhupada's statements about the position of Christ essential for the development of Krsna bhakti? Personally I can't see how they are, but this brings up again the concept of the universality of a belief in a Supreme controller. To deny such universality of the spiritual experience is to deny reality and a retreat into sectarean factionalism. Such a mentality is actually anti-devotional and ends up getting expressed by such vehicles as extreme right wing Hindu Nationalisim which is just really politics. Such persons probably spend one lifetime as a Hindu and then the next life as a Muslim and on and on.

[theist]

 

Are Srila Prabhupada's statements about the position of Christ essential for the development of Krsna bhakti? Personally I can't see how they are, but this brings up again the concept of the universality of a belief in a Supreme controller. To deny such universality of the spiritual experience is to deny reality and a retreat into sectarean factionalism. Such a mentality is actually anti-devotional and ends up getting expressed by such vehicles as extreme right wing Hindu Nationalisim which is just really politics. Such persons probably spend one lifetime as a Hindu and then the next life as a Muslim and on and on.

 

Prabhupada's statement are essential for a disciple of Srila Prabhupada or those that are his followers. That is my point. Srila Prabhupada has repeated said that Lord Jesus Christ is a shaktyavesa avatar and as such a Krishna incarnation. One may not accept his statements but to then call oneself his disciple or follower is so incredibly bogus.

 

One can become Krishna conscious without hearing of Lord Jesus or even focusing on Lord Jesus because Lord Jesus Christ as a shaktyavesa avatar is included within the being of Krishna as are all avatars.

 

There are billions of such avatars that we on this planet have never heard of. They are sent throughout the universe and universes on missions of mercy. We needn't try to worship them all separately. That is impossible. What we must do is to accept Krishna as He reveals Himself to us and follow our hearts in this way.

 

I accept absolutely what you have said on universiality.

 

It is interesting to note that more concern is there for not offending and driving awaythe homosexuals who defy Prabhupada's teachings on the subject of homosex then on there is for those who accept Prabhupada's teachings on Lord Jesus Christ and who are harrassed and driven away on this forum and elsewhere for following Prabhupada's teaching on Christ. Most recently that nice devotee Her Servant.

 

Now how twisted is that?

[matarisvan]

 

It is interesting to note that more concern is there for not offending and driving awaythe homosexuals who defy Prabhupada's teachings on the subject of homosex then on there is for those who accept Prabhupada's teachings on Lord Jesus Christ and who are harrassed and driven away on this forum and elsewhere for following Prabhupada's teaching on Christ. Most recently that nice devotee Her Servant.

 

Now how twisted is that?

 

Huh? The only twist is in your own mind.

 

No one drove anyone away. HerServant was making stupid posts like genesis is ganesha and a number of such other connections based on nothing other than his/her imagination. Why will people not question such nonsense?

 

Of course....by your logic, such ideas however absurd should not be questioned or challenged...because they mirror your own christian beliefs. Questioning or disagreeing your beliefs is harassment. But you are free to disagree and criticize anyone or with anything but that is not harassment.

 

Your continued demonstration of double standards and hypocrisy are not fooling anyone.

[Kulapavana]

 

Srila Prabhupada has repeated said that Lord Jesus Christ is a shaktyavesa avatar and as such a Krishna incarnation.

 

Prabhupada never said Jesus was an incarnation of Krishna. He said Jesus was syaktavesa avatar, or a living entity specially empowered by Krsna. Prabhupada was described by Sridhara Maharaja as saktyavesa avatar as well, but no one claims he is an incarnation of Krsna.

 

First you need to understand the terms you use, before you jump to any conclusions. The Hare Christians concoct all kinds of bogus theories to promote Christianity while deriding ancient Vedic tradition and practices. To them worshiping Jesus as God is somehow Vaishnavism, while Shiva bhaktas are less intelligent "demigod worshipers... It is pure arrogance and ignorance to think like that.

[Beggar]

 

Now how twisted is that?

 

Yeah were mad as Hell and we aren't gonna take it any more, that's how twisted!

 

<table><tbody><tr><td width="10">

</td><td nowrap="nowrap" valign="top"> </td><td valign="top">We're Not Gonna Take It

 

Including: I Wanna Rock, Under the Blade, What You Don't Know (Sure Can Hurt You), and more...</td></tr></tbody></table>

[theist]

 

Prabhupada never said Jesus was an incarnation of Krishna. He said Jesus was syaktavesa avatar, or a living entity specially empowered by Krsna. Prabhupada was described by Sridhara Maharaja as saktyavesa avatar as well, but no one claims he is an incarnation of Krsna.

 

First you need to understand the terms you use, before you jump to any conclusions. The Hare Christians concoct all kinds of bogus theories to promote Christianity while deriding ancient Vedic tradition and practices. To them worshiping Jesus as God is somehow Vaishnavism, while Shiva bhaktas are less intelligent "demigod worshipers... It is pure arrogance and ignorance to think like that.

 

 

Lord Buddha is Krsna, Lord Jesus Christ was Krsna incarnation, but they were preaching to a different type of people. Therefore you'll find difference of Lord Jesus Christ teaching, Buddha's teaching, Krsna's teaching. Conv. 1972 Mexico

 

Eat it, digest it and assimilate it. I have posted this 100 times as have others.

 

You are so bogus Kulapavana in the way you position yourself as one who understands Prabhupada and speaks as if on his behalf. I know I don't but I have read enough of what he gave the world to know you are way off base in so much of what you say.

 

Get a vedabase, read every thing Prabhupada said or wrote (that is recorded) on Lord Jesus Christ and then talk. Now you may still disagree with Prabhupada and choose to remain a Hindu convert but at least you will be cured of the delusion that you speak on his behalf.

[Kulapavana]

Eat the entire meal, not just the dessert:

 

 

During Morning Walk on April 6, 1974, Bombay Prabhupada says:

"Yes, there are different types of saktyavesa avatara. So when an ordinary jiva is specially empowered, he is called saktya avesa avatara, satktyavesa avatara, vibhuti. Yad yad vibhutimat sattvam. He is living entity, but especially empowered. Just like for certain business I give sometimes somebody power of attorney, that "He will do this. He will sign for me." Like that. He is also one of the disciples, but for particular purpose, he is given the power of attorney. In this way when a living entity is empowered specifically to do something, that is called saktyavesa avatara. Avesa avatara. Krishna sakti vina nahe nama pracara. These are explained in the Caitanya-caritamrta. saktya Mama tejo-'msa-sambhavam. So saktyavesa avatara is not visnu-tattva. He is jiva-tattva. So the Lord Jesus Christ or Lord Buddha, they come within the jiva-tattva especial power."

 

DON'T twist the words of Prabhupada by pulling an odd quote or single sentence, creating BOGUS theories.

[Kulapavana]

 

You are so bogus Kulapavana in the way you position yourself as one who understands Prabhupada and speaks as if on his behalf.

 

I understand enough of Prabhupada to explain his teachings to others in many cases. But I dont make a claim to speak on his behalf.

 

He attracted to Vaishnavism Hare Christians like yourself, and "Hindu traditionalists" like myself. Jaya Prabhupada!

[theist]

 

I understand enough of Prabhupada to explain his teachings to others in many cases. But I dont make a claim to speak on his behalf.

 

He attracted to Vaishnavism Hare Christians like yourself, and "Hindu traditionalists" like myself. Jaya Prabhupada!

 

Only problem is you do claim so in the manner in which you post. And I never grew up a Christian despite your repeated claims to the contrary. I grew up an atheist. Nor am I a Christian Hindu or any other thing now whereas you have become Hindu in your thinking as shown on this forum totally missing the point of Vaisnavism which is transcendental.

[theist]

 

Eat the entire meal, not just the dessert:

 

 

During Morning Walk on April 6, 1974, Bombay Prabhupada says:

"Yes, there are different types of saktyavesa avatara. So when an ordinary jiva is specially empowered, he is called saktya avesa avatara, satktyavesa avatara, vibhuti. Yad yad vibhutimat sattvam. He is living entity, but especially empowered. Just like for certain business I give sometimes somebody power of attorney, that "He will do this. He will sign for me." Like that. He is also one of the disciples, but for particular purpose, he is given the power of attorney. In this way when a living entity is empowered specifically to do something, that is called saktyavesa avatara. Avesa avatara. Krishna sakti vina nahe nama pracara. These are explained in the Caitanya-caritamrta. saktya Mama tejo-'msa-sambhavam. So saktyavesa avatara is not visnu-tattva. He is jiva-tattva. So the Lord Jesus Christ or Lord Buddha, they come within the jiva-tattva especial power."

 

DON'T twist the words of Prabhupada by pulling an odd quote or single sentence, creating BOGUS theories.

 

Never said Jesus wasn't a jiva. Buddha was jiva. Vyasadeva was jiva. Narada muni was jiva. Prithu was jiva. etc. And all referred to as incarnations.

 

Acintya-bhedabheda.

 

Still can't admit you were wrong. Eat it like a good boy and go take your nap.

[theist]

Kulapavana, as you are now on my ignore list I suggest you place me on yours. Better we don't mix.

[cbrahma]

 

Christianity has no place in GV siddhanta. Do you see it addressed by the shastras or 6 Goswamis? And on the fall theory Prabhupada said very clearly: "The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikunthha planet, for it is the eternal abode." (Srimad Bhagavatam, 3.16.26 purport.). But to attract Hare Krishnas like you, he also said that "we all come from Vaikuntha" - another "snake is a rope" trick.

Your understanding of Vaisnavism is so limited, so sectarian that one wonders in what way Prabhupada could be your siksa guru. You filter what he says to suit your sectarian biases, when even he up to his grand-guru Bhaktivinode Thakur saw no siddhantic disqualification in Christianity.

Furthermore to accomodate your narrow vision, you invent labels like 'Hare Christian' that were never used until many years after Prabhupada's samadhi.

[cbrahma]

 

I understand enough of Prabhupada to explain his teachings to others in many cases. But I dont make a claim to speak on his behalf.

 

He attracted to Vaishnavism Hare Christians like yourself, and "Hindu traditionalists" like myself. Jaya Prabhupada!

 

When were Hindu traditionalists attracted? At the time Prabhupada was preaching I saw no Indians in ISKCON temples. For the most part the Math disciples and gurus were criticizing him.

[raghu]

 

Agreed, but the Brits did what they had to do. As a conquering race, their job was to demoralize the enemy, which they did. Not that it makes it right, but it's *normal* for the conqueror to demoralize the enemy by attacking his culture and so on; it's more or less a war tactic. If not forgivable, at least it's understandable.

 

But what is neither forgivable nor understandable is Indians doing the exact same thing.

 

The clincher is that the British never declared war. They like most European colonialists justified their presence on the grounds of "benevolent rule." Which of course was just another conceit aka the white man's burden, etc.

 

Now thanks to their legacy we have an educational system that is brazenly hostile to Hindus and Hinduism. The things Indian intellectuals are habituated to say about Hinduism will often not be repeated in the West for fear of being accused of bigotry.

[AncientMariner]

 

Your understanding of Vaisnavism is so limited, so sectarian that one wonders in what way Prabhupada could be your siksa guru. You filter what he says to suit your sectarian biases, when even he up to his grand-guru Bhaktivinode Thakur saw no siddhantic disqualification in Christianity.

Furthermore to accomodate your narrow vision, you invent labels like 'Hare Christian' that were never used until many years after Prabhupada's samadhi.

 

 

I just don't get how Hare Christian is actually a cutdown. Essentially Kulapavana has admitted on this thread that his guru Srila Prabhupada characterized Jesus as a saktyavesa avatara which if I am not mistaken means that Jesus should be given the same basic respect that you would give to an incarnation of Krishna.

My understanding is that Kulapavana and Guruvani have determined through reading Prabhupada's mind that Prabhupada was just merely playing a trick on the idiot westerners and their irrational, sentimental attachment to Jesus when he said Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar and other nice things. Apparantly to Kulapavana and Guruvani, Prabhupada was lying about Jesus being an avatar with the ultimate goal of enticing idiot westerners to become completely assimilated into the Vaisnava tradition.

Its not a view I to because I have seen so many quotes by Prabhupada in regards to Jesus that Prabhupada would be a real disingenuous person and not worthy of being a guru in my opinion if he said some of the nice things he said about Jesus but didn't really mean it. My view however is not at all appreciated in Vaisnava circles because I am viewed as one of those idiot "Hare Christians" so basically I am just killing time on the internet.

[cbrahma]

 

I just don't get how Hare Christian is actually a cutdown. Essentially Kulapavana has admitted on this thread that his guru Srila Prabhupada characterized Jesus as a saktyavesa avatara which if I am not mistaken means that Jesus should be given the same basic respect that you would give to an incarnation of Krishna.

My understanding is that Kulapavana and Guruvani have determined through reading Prabhupada's mind that Prabhupada was just merely playing a trick on the idiot westerners and their irrational, sentimental attachment to Jesus when he said Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar and other nice things. Apparantly to Kulapavana and Guruvani, Prabhupada was lying about Jesus being an avatar with the ultimate goal of enticing idiot westerners to become completely assimilated into the Vaisnava tradition.

Its not a view I to because I have seen so many quotes by Prabhupada in regards to Jesus that Prabhupada would be a real disingenuous person and not worthy of being a guru in my opinion if he said some of the nice things he said about Jesus but didn't really mean it. My view however is not at all appreciated in Vaisnava circles because I am viewed as one of those idiot "Hare Christians" so basically I am just killing time on the internet.

Well considering the source, the label is meant as a pejorative. The very idea that Christianity could be included under the category of Vaisnavism is an affront to the traditional Hindu. They are very proud of their status. Like most bigots they want to 'keep it pure', very much in the same way that Hitler wanted to keep the Aryans pure from the contamination of Jewish inflitration. It hides ugly sectarian hostility.

[AncientMariner]

 

Kulapavana, as you are now on my ignore list I suggest you place me on yours. Better we don't mix.

 

 

I can understand what you are saying but I gotta admit I enjoy reading the posts of people I tend to disagree with philosophically. If you don't take it all too serious it can be kind of fun in my opinion.

[theist]

 

I can understand what you are saying but I gotta admit I enjoy reading the posts of people I tend to disagree with philosophically. If you don't take it all too serious it can be kind of fun in my opinion.

 

It is serious though and not meant to be sense gratification. That and I have heard it all before too many times. I am a slow learner.