cbrahma Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 The same old hypocrisy and denial. Originally Posted by cbrahma The acaryas have every support from scripture. What is your scriptural reference to prove otherwise? My Response Calling your bluff....which scripture mentions christ-loka? If you cannot produce evidence then I suggest you keep silent and stop your long drawn nonsense on this forum. In your fevered imagination. I answered your ridiculous accusation and all you are capable of is making groundless wholesale insults. Get a life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tackleberry Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 In your fevered imagination. I answered your ridiculous accusation and all you are capable of is making groundless wholesale insults. Get a life. Why don't you just answer this question for our benefit? Do you or do you not believe in Christ loka? If you do, please provide shruti pramANa. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Even Jesus is on his way to Krishna. I hope you meant to say Christians are on their way and not Jesus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realist31 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Very Simple ,Vaishanava GODS like Rama or Krishna were not as perfect as a GOD is,they are avatars and not parabrahm like the Trinity of gods. Rama killed Vaali hiding behind the trees,no matter what you say to justify it,it still shows Vaalis powers are more superior to Ramas and it makes it seem he has no way to kill Vaali other than by deciet Same way Krsna sided Pandavas even though Pandavas were far from perfect,how else do u explain the arrogance of Bheema and Arjuna all along Mahabaratha and still Krsna side them and also kill Kauravas by pure deciet and treason. So that is why these Avatars(Not GODS)are targetted Rama and Krishna died like mortals they are not GODS but Avatars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realist31 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 This is because Lord Ram is highly famous. That is why, they target Him. ALso he killed vaali hiding from behind which shows he was desperate and proved he wasnt confident of beating him face to face,which makes me flawful. Also Rama and Krsna both died and that makes them mortals Just imagine this Krishna enjoyed lot of women,if any man does that its considered Adultery,so you are not questioning him just cause he is a Avatar,but people who have no fear and love to GOD question them. Ramas act would be attribute to cowardise if he was a man and not a avatar so you are not questioning him just cause he is a Avatar,but people who have no fear and love to GOD question them. But the fact is we are a piece of Narayana so we are allowed to criticise Rama or Krishna but not Narayana.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarva gattah Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Very Simple ,Vaishanava GODS like Rama or Krishna were not as perfect as a GOD is,they are avatars and not parabrahm like the Trinity of gods. Firstly the Brahma Samhita teaches us that Krishna is the cause of all causes, the original and only Supreme Lord or GOD. Vishnu originates from Krishna and not the other way round as many Hindu's wrongly believe. Secondly the trinity of Gods, Maha Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva, of whom Vishnu and Shiva are Vishnu-Tattva, while Brahma is jiva-tattva manage the mahat-tattva or material creation. Krishna is the original from whom the trinity, as you call Vishnu, Brahma and Shiva, originate, Krishna (GOD) is the source from where all Avatars originate. The last Avatar on this planet apeared 500 years ago and known as the Golden Avatar Lord Caitanya Maha Prabhu Thirdly, the 'LILA's' of Krishna and Rama within this material world are pastimes or play to also attract the conditioned souls back home back to Godhead, which is outside this temporary mahat-tattva or material creation This perpetual place of Vaikuntha and Goloka-Vrndavana is the real eternal home of all living entities and is not of this material world that only appears as a cloud within the Spiritual Sky Fourthly, Here is some back ground. The Caitanya Caritamrita is one of the primary biographies detailing the life and teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1533), a prominent Vaishnava saint, and founder of the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition. It was written by Krishna Das Kaviraja (b1496), primarily in the Bengali language, but also including a great number of Sanskrit verses within its devotional, poetic construction. Intertwined with the pastimes of Caitanya Mahaprabhu's life are philosophical conversations detailing the process of Bhakti Yoga, with special attention given to the public chanting of Krishna's names and the Hare Krishna mantra. It is revered as a sacred text by followers of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and is the means of deliverance within this age of Kali-yuga, of whom Lord Caitanya is the Golden Avatar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matarisvan Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Firstly the Brahma Samhita teaches us that Krishna is the cause of all causes, the original and only Supreme Lord or GOD. Brahma Samhita the scripture that has been known and followed for thousands of years by all Vaishnavas must be right compared to the Mahabharata and Puranas which are known only to Gaudiyas and are only a few hundred years old. Vishnu originates from Krishna and not the other way round as many Hindu's wrongly believe. It is sad that Hindus have decided to follow thousand of years of tradition and scriptures instead of learning the real truth about Krishna and Vishnu from iskcon Christians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realist31 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Firstly the Brahma Samhita teaches us that Krishna is the cause of all causes, . Well if that is true then the Criticism he gets is also originate from him,if Visnu originated from Krsna so did the asuras and aethists,you me and everyone,then why judge anyone,even those who criticize him?Its all Krsna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krishnadasa Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Sometimes, i feel strange that most of the atheists, so-called modern craps always target vaishnava gods such as krsna,rama or vishnu to blame god and also extend of humilating vaishnava gods in a degrading manner Also in films (mostly southindian) vaishnavas & vaishnavas are targeted or humilated whenever opportunity comes to disgrace God. Also atheist politicians and atheists target vaishnav-gods rather than other hindu-sect gods. For ex:- Burning of sri-ram picture in tamilnadu by a political group, Disgracing rama by Tamilnadu CM, Categorizing Rama as north-indian god by a stupid actor sathyaraja during a food-fast function. It is actually humorous that even though many so called uncivilised rituals done in hindu-religion are actually done by shaivas/sakthas and so called funy fake sadhus come in guise of shaivas, but still vaishnavas are targeted . Om Namo Narayanaya The demons doom to fail, and what is this new thing , I have never heard of North-Indian God,, LOL,Sathyaraja what a jerk??? what all sri-vaishnawas were doing when he was saying this??? Ofcourse its very true that we do not need to do anything fo this as Lord himself takes care,, but the devotees should not have missed this opportunity to revolt against this demon called Sathyaraja.. Hari bol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krishnadasa Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Honestly, I have lost hope on our country very long time ago. I cant expect a street wanderer to change on my words, when I am not able to do so with my own people at home. When it comes Islam its totally naive and also blind, it has a tendency to attack from the front . And whoever comes in between it just go on killing, just like its kings and emporers, who did that in India, however there is merit in this religion, it shows whatever it has right infront of you, and coz of which you have the option to choose or not to choose from your heart, and proobably this is/was the reason why India never became an Islamic nation. However, when it comes to modern christianity, indeed the christianity it has a face which is fully disguised , and this is like a slow poison which goes through your mind and settles in your blood, it never gives a chance to think about to accept or not to accept.. Just like slow poison that kills bit by bit. And this christianity is takin over our nation -culturally. And it is doing so on the name of eradicating poverty. Mugals left, and left theor blood, English left they left their poisonous culture. Now, it seems like its highly irreversible. I cant see India getting its spiritual glory in near future. Even if it becomes very rich (which is very un- likely), it will never be able to teach that sublime lesson of soul, which it used to for ages... Krishna save Bharath, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbrahma Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Why don't you just answer this question for our benefit? Do you or do you not believe in Christ loka? If you do, please provide shruti pramANa. Thank you. It wasn't a question. It was an assumption. I don't have to 'believe' in Christ loka to know that Christianity fits under the umbrella of Vaisnavism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Prabhupada also said that Islam was Vaishnavism too, and that Prophet Muhammad was a saktyavesa avatar: "So therefore, by that symptom, we accept Lord Jesus Christ as Saktyaves avatara, or Hazrat Muhammad, he's also. Because these two religious leaders of the world, they preached about the glorification of the Supreme Lord. And they sacrificed everything for preaching the glories of the Lord. Therefore... And their influence and their followers, there are... These are the symptoms by which we can understand that Jesus Christ and Hazrat Muhammad was, were Saktyaves avataras. ( CC Madhya-lila 20.367-84) Where is your or Theist's respect for Islam? You pride yourself to be "non-sectarian" yet I do not see you ever say anything nice about Islam. You are simply just as sectarian as all the other people here, with your sentiments limited to the group you yourself represent. Prabhupada was not lying, but you just don't actually understand what he is saying. Muslims in general seem to be a lot like many Christians in the fact that they have seemed to miss the point of what their avatars were teaching. I don't think you will ever find anywhere where I have been disrespectful to Muhammad even though I have not always agreed with some Muslim fanaticism. Its your choice if you don't believe that Jesus or Muhammad is an avatar but I don't see any shame in being a so called Hare Christian based on the nice things Prabhupada said about Jesus even though you seem to claim to have the ultimate understanding of what Prabhupada meant by those statements. I take them at face value but if you want to read a bunch of tricks and games on Prabhupadas part that is your perogative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matarisvan Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Muslims in general seem to be a lot like many Christians in the fact that they have seemed to miss the point of what their avatars were teaching. Is it not the same old arrogance again? Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple. I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbrahma Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Is it not the same old arrogance again? Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple. I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion. The point is that Vaisnavas are not just 'Hare Krsnas'. Siva is a Vaisnava. Is he a 'Hare Krsna'. That's really missing the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Is it not the same old arrogance again? Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple. I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion. Just my opinion that Christians that hate their neighbors and Muslims that engage in terrorism are missing the point of their religion. It has nothing to do with being a Hare Krishna even though I am not officially any kind of Hare Krishna although I do find it moderately pleasurable to chant every now and then and I do enjoy reading Prabhupada's books. Just stating my opinion on the matter, didn't mean it arrogantly so I apologize if I offended you in some way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 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. There is always gonna be opposing viewpoints so I don't see any need to shut myself off from that but whatever you are comfortable with. Just let them keep coming and kill them with kindness because all the debates have already been debated 100's of times and everyone is pretty firmly entrenched in their positions it seems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulapavana Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Its your choice if you don't believe that Jesus or Muhammad is an avatar but I don't see any shame in being a so called Hare Christian based on the nice things Prabhupada said about Jesus even though you seem to claim to have the ultimate understanding of what Prabhupada meant by those statements. I take them at face value but if you want to read a bunch of tricks and games on Prabhupadas part that is your perogative. I believe they were just ordinary people empowered by God. Prabhupada warned us against accepting jivas as God. Thus Christians who accept Jesus as God are wrong in a fundamental way. I reject this type of worship and religion, just like I reject the worship of Sai Baba as God. Muslims at least do not worship their Prophet as God and in that way can be seen as closer to Vaishnavism than Christianity. But I would still not consider them to be Vaishnavas, unless you define the term "Vaishnava" as merely "theist". Shivaites are teists too, yet Prabhupada calls them "demigod worshippers". To me, that is very inconsistent. That is why I concluded that preaching to people of Abrahamic faith Prabhupada adopted the broadest possible definition of Vaishnavism in order to make the transition to the actual Vaishnavism easier for these people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 I believe they were just ordinary people empowered by God. Prabhupada warned us against accepting jivas as God. Thus Christians who accept Jesus as God are wrong in a fundamental way. I reject this type of worship and religion, just like I reject the worship of Sai Baba as God. Muslims at least do not worship their Prophet as God and in that way can be seen as closer to Vaishnavism than Christianity. But I would still not consider them to be Vaishnavas, unless you define the term "Vaishnava" as merely "theist". Shivaites are teists too, yet Prabhupada calls them "demigod worshippers". To me, that is very inconsistent. That is why I concluded that preaching to people of Abrahamic faith Prabhupada adopted the broadest possible definition of Vaishnavism in order to make the transition to the actual Vaishnavism easier for these people. My understanding is that a saktyavesa avatar should be given the same respect as Krishna even though they are not actually Krishna I think they max out at about 78% of the attributes of Krishna so based on that conception I have no problems with the so called Hare Christians although I agree it is foolish of people to say that Jesus is God and I don't to that mentality although I believe Jesus should be given the same respect as God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realist31 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Is it not the same old arrogance again? Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple. I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion. Very well said,this is the bottomline of every so called devotee who bashes the other,it all started with Prabupada calling Lord Siva as Demigod and twisted lot of things to suit him and thats pure EGO working there and people fail to acknowledge,like one user here said it all comes from Krishna,then why bother to call someone demon or nonbeliever when its all Krishna who originites? Why not allow people to criticise avatars like Rama who did have flaws like i mentioned and not judge them saying "Oh how dare you criticise Rama,you Southies are demons blah blah" No one seem to answer some important questions here as to why Hare Krsna people are still not in GOLOKA and what is that great about GOLOKA compared to Indralok etc..im sure they will come up with answers which the brain generates but again the others dont know anything and have figured out nothing except them What different is this to Christians who believe only they go to heaven and all others rot in HELL.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 I believe they were just ordinary people empowered by God. Prabhupada warned us against accepting jivas as God. Thus Christians who accept Jesus as God are wrong in a fundamental way. I reject this type of worship and religion, just like I reject the worship of Sai Baba as God. Muslims at least do not worship their Prophet as God and in that way can be seen as closer to Vaishnavism than Christianity. But I would still not consider them to be Vaishnavas, unless you define the term "Vaishnava" as merely "theist". Shivaites are teists too, yet Prabhupada calls them "demigod worshippers". To me, that is very inconsistent. That is why I concluded that preaching to people of Abrahamic faith Prabhupada adopted the broadest possible definition of Vaishnavism in order to make the transition to the actual Vaishnavism easier for these people. Do you think Prabhupada is gonna clear things up on the other side and tell us that Jesus wasn't really a saktyavesa avatar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Is it not the same old arrogance again? Christians missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Muslims missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Hindus missed the point...we know this because we Hare Krishnas got the point. Ultimately Hare Krishnas have got everything right. These who differ have got it wrong. Plain and Simple. I am not as baffled by this arrogance as I am at the nonsense value of such an attitude towards religion. Cut us some slack will ya? We are just going off of the book Bhagavad Gita As It Is and Srimad Bhagavatam. If it turns out Prabhupada was wrong then I apologize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulapavana Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Do you think Prabhupada is gonna clear things up on the other side and tell us that Jesus wasn't really a saktyavesa avatar? Did I EVER deny Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar? He is. Still, that does not make Christianity a true Vaishnaviasm, or justify accepting Jesus to be God. I have heard from some devotees that Prabhupada once said Hitler was also a saktyavesa avatar, because his special DESTRUCTIVE power was given to him by God. You still think every saktyavesa avatar should be worshipped just like Krsna? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Did I EVER deny Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar? He is. Still, that does not make Christianity a true Vaishnaviasm, or justify accepting Jesus to be God. I have heard from some devotees that Prabhupada once said Hitler was also a saktyavesa avatar, because his special DESTRUCTIVE power was given to him by God. You still think every saktyavesa avatar should be worshipped just like Krsna? Do you think saktyavesa avatars should be disrespected? At least I got you to clarify that you believe Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar. I think Prabhupada refered to Christianity as a crude form of Vaisnavism so where you get the notion that he was arguing that it is pure Vaisnavism is beyond me. I thought I read a statement of yours once that said Christianity has nothing to do with Vaisnavism or something to that effect but if not then I apologize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realist31 Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 I believe they were just ordinary people empowered by God. Prabhupada warned us against accepting jivas as God. Thus Christians who accept Jesus as God are wrong in a fundamental way. I reject this type of worship and religion, just like I reject the worship of Sai Baba as God. Muslims at least do not worship their Prophet as God and in that way can be seen as closer to Vaishnavism than Christianity. But I would still not consider them to be Vaishnavas, unless you define the term "Vaishnava" as merely "theist". Shivaites are teists too, yet Prabhupada calls them "demigod worshippers". To me, that is very inconsistent. That is why I concluded that preaching to people of Abrahamic faith Prabhupada adopted the broadest possible definition of Vaishnavism in order to make the transition to the actual Vaishnavism easier for these people. Why should Prabupadas words be final?Just curious about it thats all,i dont hate him but why is every other prophet or god man or anyones word not taken,Sai Baba claims people are fools who dont realise he is GOD himself,why not take his word and why only Prabupada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AncientMariner Posted May 9, 2008 Report Share Posted May 9, 2008 Why should Prabupadas words be final?Just curious about it thats all,i dont hate him but why is every other prophet or god man or anyones word not taken,Sai Baba claims people are fools who dont realise he is GOD himself,why not take his word and why only Prabupada I take Prabhupadas words seriously because he manifested certain good qualities that speak for themselves and set him apart from just an average joe. So it isn't just blind faith. If you see those qualities in Sai Baba then take Sai Baba seriously its up to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.