Why Vaishnava & Vaishnav Gods Targeted ?

[cbrahma]

 

Because moron, the christian 'God' is certainly not part of Vaishnavism. And which Gaudiya Vaishnava acharya prior to BVT mentioned that the Bible is Veda, or that Jesus is Vaishnava?

 

Your 'God' does not conform to the Brahman of the Vedas and Upanishads. Therefore, 'God' is not part of Vaishnavism.

 

 

 

The only relevance it has to this topic is that it proves your blind belief.

Bhakti yoga has every relevance to all religions.

All of your touted Vedic knowledge amounts to nothing if you haven't grapsed that siddhanta.

I didn't quote it to start up with the assinine sectarian controversy again but to show how the true acaryas celebrate the One-ness of the true God and the universality of bhakti as the essence of religion.

It is not my problem, nor my concoction. I simply quoted and you spouted your sectarian ignorance once more.

[cbrahma]

 

No aparadha on my part. There are differences in philosophy as far as schools of Vedanta are concerned, but I strictly maintain respect for every acharya, and any bhakta of Vishnu deserves this respect.

 

There are many instances in our sastras where offenders of devotees have been punished severely. It is for this reason that a Vaishnava, be he a Madhva, Sri Vaishnava or Gaudiya Vaishnava, should maintain respect for other sampradayic personalities as well.

 

That being said, of course, I disagree with BVT on various points. And 'God' is not even a Vaidika term, although we use it commonly. 'Brahman' is the ultimate Being. That is what I was trying to say, which cBrahma failed to comprehend.

I see this as the difference between what has come to be called Hinduism and true Vaisnavism.

[Dark Warrior]

 

Bhakti yoga has every relevance to all religions

 

Tell me, why did Krishna forbid the Gokula people to worship Indra?

 

Bhakti Yoga to Indra and Shiva are not enough for moksha. Same goes for a non-vedic religion like Christianity.

 

And Sri Vaishnavas do not accept the definition of 'Bhakti-Yoga', as provided by Gaudiyas. Your inability to understand sampradayic differences is incredible.

 

To Sri Ramanujacharya, the Bhakti-Yoga Sri Krishna outlines in the Gita is none other than the "nididhyAsana", "upAsana", and "vedana" repeatedly enjoined in the Upanishads and formalized in the Brahma-sutras. Each of the latter three terms means deep, undivided, loving contemplation on the Supreme Self. Lord Krishna, in His conversation with Arjuna, emphasized the "love" aspect more, and the Upanishads the "meditative", but it is evident from even a brief glance that the two must go hand in hand. What one loves, one seeks to know more and delve into deeper.

 

However, I am not interested in arguing philosophy. I understand that there are differences. Hare Christnas believe that their theology is the be all and end all of Vaishnavism.

 

I go. A 100 replies in that Jesus thread, followed by many other rebuttals provided by other members, have not succeeded in making you realise your incompetance. I hardly think my replies will be successful.

[Kulapavana]

 

I go. A 100 replies in that Jesus thread, followed by many other rebuttals provided by other members, have not succeeded in making you realise your incompetance. I hardly think my replies will be successful.

 

Prabhu, arguments cannot change people who have no desire to change. People see what they want to see, and Krsna as the Supersoul gives them faith in whatever they desire to believe.

 

The point of suche debates should be primarily to provide "arguments to the contrary" so that innocent bystanders who have a DESIRE to change will find inspiration in our words.

[AncientMariner]

 

Tell me, why did Krishna forbid the Gokula people to worship Indra?

 

Bhakti Yoga to Indra and Shiva are not enough for moksha. Same goes for a non-vedic religion like Christianity.

 

And Sri Vaishnavas do not accept the definition of 'Bhakti-Yoga', as provided by Gaudiyas. Your inability to understand sampradayic differences is incredible.

 

To Sri Ramanujacharya, the Bhakti-Yoga Sri Krishna outlines in the Gita is none other than the "nididhyAsana", "upAsana", and "vedana" repeatedly enjoined in the Upanishads and formalized in the Brahma-sutras. Each of the latter three terms means deep, undivided, loving contemplation on the Supreme Self. Lord Krishna, in His conversation with Arjuna, emphasized the "love" aspect more, and the Upanishads the "meditative", but it is evident from even a brief glance that the two must go hand in hand. What one loves, one seeks to know more and delve into deeper.

 

However, I am not interested in arguing philosophy. I understand that there are differences. Hare Christnas believe that their theology is the be all and end all of Vaishnavism.

 

I go. A 100 replies in that Jesus thread, followed by many other rebuttals provided by other members, have not succeeded in making you realise your incompetance. I hardly think my replies will be successful.

 

 

I can understand what you are saying and you make some valid points . I think I am what most people would on this forum would and have classified as a "Hare Christian" because I take Prabhupada at face value in his statement that Jesus has the symptoms of a saktyavesa avatara. I do not believe my theology is the end all be all of Vaisnavism I just merely can see what Prabhupada was saying when he said Jesus had the symptoms of a saktyavesa avatar and that Chrisianity is a crude form of Vaisnavism. I admit that Christianity is incomplete in that it doesn't say who God is and only has the abstract concept of God as the Father but on some level there is some similarity to Vaisnavism because in my understanding of Vaisnavism Krishna is seen as the father of all living entities. Just my opinion, not trying to get into all of these personal attacks just because there are lots of philosophical divisions on this issue.

[cbrahma]

 

Tell me, why did Krishna forbid the Gokula people to worship Indra?

 

Bhakti Yoga to Indra and Shiva are not enough for moksha. Same goes for a non-vedic religion like Christianity.

 

And Sri Vaishnavas do not accept the definition of 'Bhakti-Yoga', as provided by Gaudiyas. Your inability to understand sampradayic differences is incredible.

 

Obviously you do not accept Gaudiya Vaisnavism - so that our discussion on the subject is at an end.

Incompetence defined as contradicting you by citing the authority of great acaryas? I am glad of such incompetence.

Bhakti yoga - is according to the Bhagavad Gita to be practiced in service to Krsna - not Indra nor some other demigod.

[cbrahma]

 

Prabhu, arguments cannot change people who have no desire to change

So true. Which explains your persistence beyond reason especially in taking the part of somebody who attacks Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas. Very rational indeed.

[Shakti-Fan]

 

So true. Which explains your persistence beyond reason especially in taking the part of somebody who attacks Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas. Very rational indeed.

 

The Pot calling the kettle, black?

[Kulapavana]

 

So true. Which explains your persistence beyond reason especially in taking the part of somebody who attacks Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas. Very rational indeed.

 

Pointing out facts is not an attack on anybody. Refusal to admit that facts indeed exist and do matter is a sign of irrational and cultist following. You can start with admitting that Moon is closer to Earth than Sun, and that Prabhupada was wrong proclaiming otherwise.

 

For cult followers like you this may be an attack on your leader, but for everybody else it is a sign of sanity.

[Kulapavana]

 

The Pot calling the kettle, black?

 

That indeed... but of course these other Vaishnava acharyas are not acharyas at all for the cult grouppies: they are just sudra pretenders with sahajiya tendencies.

 

These people can dish out disrespect, but have no stomach to take it themselves.

[cbrahma]

 

The Pot calling the kettle, black?

Precisely.

[cbrahma]

 

That indeed... but of course these other Vaishnava acharyas are not acharyas at all for the cult grouppies: they are just sudra pretenders with sahajiya tendencies.

 

These people can dish out disrespect, but have no stomach to take it themselves.

 

I explain , I support with acarya authority, I affiliate with no group but still you must desperately have to take shelter of this platitude about 'groupies' and 'cults' without a shred of evidence to support your 'ad hominem' But then 'ad hominem' doesn't depend on evidence or logic for that matter.

It is the mainstay of petty politics and guru politics is as petty as it gets.

[matarisvan]

 

That indeed... but of course these other Vaishnava acharyas are not acharyas at all for the cult grouppies: they are just sudra pretenders with sahajiya tendencies.

 

These people can dish out disrespect, but have no stomach to take it themselves.

 

Someone named realist suddenly jumped into the thread sometime back. In his eyes, people discussing scriptures are either gaudiya Vaishnavas or mayavadis. No other category exists for this genius.

 

Same problem with many others here...vaishnavism is gauidya vaishnavism only. Their brains cannot comprehend the existence of other branches of vaishnavism in spite of them existing longer and in larger groups.

[matarisvan]

 

I explain , I support with acarya authority, I affiliate with no group but still you must desperately have to take shelter of this platitude about 'groupies' and 'cults' without a shred of evidence to support your 'ad hominem' But then 'ad hominem' doesn't depend on evidence or logic for that matter.

It is the mainstay of petty politics and guru politics is as petty as it gets.

 

Kulapavana,

 

Do you see cbrahma avoided your challenge to accept prabhupada made a mistake about the moon?

 

He is incredibly stupid or very cunning. Both are equally bad.

[Kulapavana]

 

I explain , I support with acarya authority, I affiliate with no group...

 

if it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck.... it IS a duck.

 

if you can't think for yourself, if you can't follow reason and logic - you are a blind follower, a grouppie, a cult member. At least in my eyes.

 

I am a member of Iskcon, but I am not a blind follower. I have no problem seeing the errors in my own group.

[Kulapavana]

 

Do you see cbrahma avoided your challenge to accept prabhupada made a mistake about the moon?

 

He is incredibly stupid or very cunning. Both are equally bad.

 

I am not sure why some people refuse to face the facts, but it is often out of fear.

 

They have built this house of cards in their mind, and when it looks like the assumptions on which that house stands are false, they are afraid it will all collapse. I actually understand and have a lot of compassion for such people.

 

When your faith is shaken, it is often very traumatic. But you can't make progress untill you start building on a proper foundation, proper knowledge.

 

These people are not a good indication of the greatness of Prabhupada as a guru. You do not have to invent fake glories of Prabhupada to make him great. He is great on his own merit.

[cbrahma]

 

if it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck.... it IS a duck.

 

if you can't think for yourself, if you can't follow reason and logic - you are a blind follower, a grouppie, a cult member. At least in my eyes.

 

I am a member of Iskcon, but I am not a blind follower. I have no problem seeing the errors in my own group.

Your duck observations are faulty. I am quite an independant thinker, to all who know me and I know the protocol of quoting from authority. I am forever having to disentangle the logical fallacies I see being committed in the name or political and sentimental attachment. That is the Vaisnava requirement. Argument from authority. Do you deny this for one guru and yet cling to it for another?

[cbrahma]

 

Kulapavana,

 

Do you see cbrahma avoided your challenge to accept prabhupada made a mistake about the moon?

 

He is incredibly stupid or very cunning. Both are equally bad.

That is a challenge? Where and when? It is completely off a different thread on a different topic. I have already addressed this picayune transparent ploy to detract from the main issues.

[cbrahma]

 

I am not sure why some people refuse to face the facts, but it is often out of fear.

 

 

What you determine to be true is a fact? LOL.

[Kulapavana]

 

What you determine to be true is a fact?

 

To me, the Moon being closer to the Earth than the Sun is a fact. Prabhupada having a different opinion is also fact. And it is also a fact, that many of Prabhupada's followers refuse to face these two facts. Iskcon is even building a Temple of Vedic planetarium while refusing to address these two facts. What is at the base of such refusal? IMO it is fear. I know several Iskcon gurus and sannyasis who privately agree Prabhupada was wrong on that one. But they do not have the courage to openly admit that. They will do nothing to undermine the myth of "infallible" acharya. It serves them well too.

[AncientMariner]

I have come to the conclusion the moon is simultaneoulsy closer to the Earth and closer to the sun but it all depends upon which form of life you are embodied in.

[cbrahma]

 

To me, the Moon being closer to the Earth than the Sun is a fact. Prabhupada having a different opinion is also fact. And it is also a fact, that many of Prabhupada's followers refuse to face these two facts. Iskcon is even building a Temple of Vedic planetarium while refusing to address these two facts. What is at the base of such refusal? IMO it is fear. I know several Iskcon gurus and sannyasis who privately agree Prabhupada was wrong on that one. But they do not have the courage to openly admit that. They will do nothing to undermine the myth of "infallible" acharya. It serves them well too.

The Vedic account is talking about subtle planets but I don't want to re-enter that topic as much as you want to pull on that red herring.

I only consider Prabhupada to be infallible on matters of siddhanta. The relevance of the moon's distance in insignficant in that regard. Of course that would apply to your favorite siksa gurus as well.

[theist]

 

The Vedic account is talking about subtle planets but I don't want to re-enter that topic as much as you want to pull on that red herring.

I only consider Prabhupada to be infallible on matters of siddhanta. The relevance of the moon's distance in insignficant in that regard. Of course that would apply to your favorite siksa gurus as well.

 

Ditto that. Pick up the transcendental gems wherever Krishna shows them to you and leave the rest.

[Beggar]

 

I only consider Prabhupada to be infallible on matters of siddhanta.

 

But on 4-8-08 here is cbrahma strenuously objecting to the trinad api su-nicena siksastakam verse of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu:

 

 

Condition upon condition, complication on top of complication, rule upon rule - until one is so strained and constrained - it becomes a excercise in futility.

It's a lot like telling somebody that there is a potion that will make you invulnerable but you have to leap over tall buildings to get it.

[Kulapavana]

 

The Vedic account is talking about subtle planets but I don't want to re-enter that topic as much as you want to pull on that red herring.

 

That is another myth making apologist theory. Prabhupada said on many occasions that the astronauts could not have been to the moon because it is further away than the sun and he even accepted the distance to the sun established by modern science as factual.