Hare Christians?

[theist]

 

Bija: It seems when people criticize us as Hare Christians, they either dont understand this point. Or, they do but simply wish to criticize.

 

True. Such is the fruit of sectarian vision. Hindu types are not the only offenders in this regard. Decades ago I learn not to listen to Christians trying to give me their view on Krishna. When I met a Christian and the subject of God consciousness comes up I try to share some of what I have learned from Gita and SB without bringing up the source which they reject immediately. But even then we can't go much beyond reincarnation. Instead I have it best to stick to topics like the futility of desiring and praying for $ and other material objects and instead ask the Lord that He draw us to Him for eternity. You get the idea anything that will strengthen the knowledge and connection with the Lord in the heart.

 

 

 

The essential point is that we are all on the path. Lord Jesus Christ is reported as saying in the gospels, that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin. I dont know whether that is true or not, but I do know that criticizing super-souls sanction in the heart of another being, is direct criticism of the working and grace of God, who wishes to bring all his children home. To be honest mate, I really need to work on that everyday, my mind is full of offence.

Beautiful point. This is what I want to learn also. Becoming in touch with the Lored in my own heart means I will become aware of His presence and working within the hearts of others for God is one.

 

 

And another important point, we do not know the depth of devotion in others hearts. They may be so loved by Krsna for their service. Truth is hidden in strange places often. We will never know the other fully if we do not search out our own. This is the mystery of the two and in a way such is found in Sri Gauranga in a very elevated pure sense of rasa!

 

Aumen

[Amlesh]

Thanks Theist reading your post is always a pleasure.

[bija]

 

Perhaps the 'humility of not knowing'.... that is what all the real guru's taught.... that none know the absolute! by bishadi

That is such a hard comment to chew:confused:. Why? We can begin to see the false ego always wants to know, and wants to be right. That ego seems to be so strong that it will even paint a false picture before its own limited eyes, to justify its existence. It does not want to die. So what to do?

 

*********************************************************

 

As a conditioned being, I cannot see the full picture. Bhaktivinoda said onetime such is the case, but he did say we can intuit it. So should one reject the teacher and book that claims to know the truth? Or, do we intuit within our heart, as an individual particle of soul, what these external manifestations are trying to point us toward.

 

Yes, Bishadi we must progress. As the external world of illusion is constantly in change, we need to intuit the essence of its meaning. On a relative level there seems to be an evolution of mind. That is what I feel (externally). Or can it be, that we are drawing closer to our 'original' self by letting go of ego, therefore constantly seeing knew levels of the external. Maybe the spiritual seeker needs to keep the false ego as a companion and friend for a season, so we learn its tricks well and get to know it, and through intimacy it may eventually listen to us, when we tell it to be quiet.

 

Maybe the wreck, has served its purpose. Until next time...(thank you bishadi).

 

 

thoughts

What I am realizing presently, in my progression, is that most of my thoughts are accompanied by that false friend. So Bishadi, your insight that we need to be honest, is correct. Here is my honesty:

 

 

As a conditioned being, I cannot see the full picture. Bhaktivinoda said onetime such is the case, but he did say we can intuit it. So should one reject the teacher and book that claims to know the truth? Or, do we intuit within our heart, as an individual particle of soul, what these external manifestations are trying to point us toward. by bija

 

Gurudeva gently guided me recently...to use the word vraaksha (when commenting) on text. Thoughts. That was kind gentle instruction...because the thoughts are not the authority. Simply expressed, as we move onward...

[bija]

 

Beautiful point. This is what I want to learn also. Becoming in touch with the Lored in my own heart means I will become aware of His presence and working within the hearts of others for God is one. by theist

Thank you Theist. Same here, I would desire very much for the others perception to enter my heart, to learn to love. Nice to see you posting.

[bija]

 

and what succintly is the principle? What single item of choice does each have at every moment? by bishadi

In the gaudiya tradition real service means service to the hladhini shakti. Srimate Radharani. Bliss potency.

 

To exhilirate anothers heart in love of God. To be an aid and assistance in the manifestation of bhava (ecstatic spiritual emotion). I think that is the cherished desire of the gaudiya guru. Because as that bhava intensifies, Krsna appears. It is said this hladhini shakti is his internal potency.

 

That would be kindness according to the tradition, and the motivating choice - as far as I see the tradition.

 

Material bhava is said to be one's own pleasure, while enjoying the lower field. Spiritual bhava for the living entity, is said to be service of the higher plain, service to Srimate Radharani. Sri Sri Radha-Krsna!

[bija]

Was sitting in the park today doing little meditation and reading. One good friend is in the process of becoming a buddhist monk. So I decided to read 'The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying by Sogyal Rinpoche'. To try and understand my friends heart, a little more.

 

There was one part of the introduction, that was touching, and I want to share it with you. Thought, you may appreciate:P.

 

Here it is...'My original hope for this book was that it would help inspire a quiet revolution in the whole way we look at death and care for the dying, and so the whole way we look at life and care for the living. Our need for spiritual transformation and to take responsibility, in the truest sense, for ourselves and others has not become any less urgent these ten years on (since first publication). What would it mean if more and more people thought seriously about their future and the future of the world? Imagine how things would be if we could live our lives infusing them with a sacred meaning; if our end-of-life care were always lit by a sense of awe in the face of death; and if we looked on life and death themselves as an inseperable whole. What would be the effect of seeking to make love and compassion the measure of every action, and of understanding, to any degree, the inmost nature of the mind that underlies our entire existence? This would be a true revolution, one that would free men and women to discover there birthright, that inner dimension so long neglected, and unite them with the fullness of the human experience in all its mystery and grandeur."

[Bishadi]

 

That is such a hard comment to chew:confused:. Why?

 

 

 

because that is the truth. Really think about it. Has any single person ever to walk the earth been able to share the absolute equal to all mankind?

 

No.

 

As that is why the diversity exists!

 

 

 

We can begin to see the false ego always wants to know, and wants to be right.

 

All conscious humans 'want to know'.... it would be false to suggest otherwise

 

 

That ego seems to be so strong that it will even paint a false picture before its own limited eyes, to justify its existence. It does not want to die. So what to do?

now you see what a belief is

 

and to remove a belief is as easy as being honest

 

 

As a conditioned being, I cannot see the full picture. Bhaktivinoda said onetime such is the case, but he did say we can intuit it.

Correct!

 

as each can experience bliss, defining it has been the universal quest

 

 

 

So should one reject the teacher and book that claims to know the truth? Or, do we intuit within our heart, as an individual particle of soul, what these external manifestations are trying to point us toward.

the teacher must teach the initial principles and compassion. the lessons teach how to self reflect; when the student knows himself, then he is to reproduce. That is the cycle of life.

 

 

Yes, Bishadi we must progress. As the external world of illusion is constantly in change, we need to intuit the essence of its meaning. On a relative level there seems to be an evolution of mind.

the illusion is when a definition cannot apply. The evolution continues to progress. The ego is of self without focus on the total. Knowing the illusion simply needs a definition gives the student a goal to focus on for the total.

 

 

 

"Each particle that awakens contributes in service to the whole."

[bija]

 

Quote:

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> So should one reject the teacher and book that claims to know the truth? Or, do we intuit within our heart, as an individual particle of soul, what these external manifestations are trying to point us toward.bija</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

the teacher must teach the initial principles and compassion. the lessons teach how to self reflect; when the student knows himself, then he is to reproduce. That is the cycle of life. by bishadi

 

... some questions for Bishadi.

What place Bishadi, do you think traditions hold for todays world?

And can we make comment on the relevance of tradition, without knowing the deeper esoteric content of those traditions? Can we make comment on their relevance without practicing the teachings for some years?

Your thoughts would be appreciated. And considered.

My liking is expressed here:

 

Notes On The Bhagavata : full e-book click here

By Bhaktivinoda Thakura

 

The Bhagavat Explains Itself:

1. It is the fruit of the tree of thought (Vedas) mixed with the nectar of the speech of Shukadeva. It is the temple of spiritual love.... [it is] composed of 18,000 Shlokas. It contains the best part of the Vedas and Vedanta.

2. The Bhagavata is pre-eminently "the Book" in India. Once enter into it, and you are transplanted, as it were, into the spiritual world where gross matter has no existence. The true follower of the Bhagavat is a spiritual man who has already cut his temporary connection with phenomenal nature, and has made himself the inhabitant of that region where God eternally exists and loves. This mighty work is founded upon inspiration and its superstructure is upon reflection. To the common reader it has no charms and is full of difficulty. We are, therefore, obliged to study it deeply through the assistance of such great commentators as Shridhara Svami and Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and His contemporary followers.

3. Now Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the great preacher of Nadia, who has been Deified by His talented followers, tells us that the Bhagavat is founded upon the four verses which Vyasa received from Narada, the most learned of the created beings. He tells us further that Brahma pierced through the whole universe of matter for years and years in quest of the final cause of the world, but when he failed to find it abroad, he looked into the construction of his own spiritual nature, and there he heard the Universal Spirit speaking unto him:

4. "...I was in the beginning before all spiritual and temporal things were created, and after they have been created I am in them all in the shape of their existence and truthfulness, and when they will be all gone I shall remain full as I was and as I am. Whatever appears to be true without being a real fact itself, and whatever is not perceived though it is true in itself are subjects of my illusory energy of creation, such as light and darkness in the material world."

5. [Like Brahma, Vyasa also] fell back into his own self and searched his own spiritual nature and then it was that the above truth was communicated to him for his own good and the good of the world. The sage immediately perceived that his former works required supercession in as much as they did not contain the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In his new idea he obtained the development of his former idea of religion. He commenced the Bhagavat in pursuance of this change.

or to express in a simple honest way: For me Srimad Bhagavatam is worshipful Deity...:namaskar:Why?...because Sri GaurangaKrishna's heart resides within it! The joy of diversity and unity!

 

'For the simple devotee, it is not important whether Krsna is God or not. He simply loves Krsna.' (paraphrased from Srila Prabhupada). The goal is not to worship God as such, but to worship the Divine Cowherd Boy.

 

That is the key point Bishadi, of faith free of awe and reverence, and free of antagonistic belief system. Each must find their heart and live it.

 

[viji_r_krishnan]

good one

[suchandra]

 

What place Bishadi, do you think traditions hold for todays world?

 

Good points, great post!

[bija]

Thanks Suchandra...and by the way I am not the cat. I am the kangaroo...

 

Oscar Wilde once said, 'No point me being anyone else, they are already taken.'

 

Just me and my dog, and eeepc.

[suchandra]

 

Thanks Suchandra...and by the way I am not the cat. I am the kangaroo...

 

Oscar Wilde once said, 'No point me being anyone else, they are already taken.'

 

Just me and my dog, and eeepc.

Since present Vaishnavas are always eager to analyze - what is the highest position?

 

In sum, Christians who are worshiping Jesus, a great devotee of the Lord, but are addicted to sinful activity are in a far better position than those who falsely claim to be absolute, liberated representatives of God, Krishna's direct successor.

 

Fooling the public to be God's direct representative, Krishna's successor, although not being qualified is most demoniac. Very, very difficult and complicated way of atonement to be finally excused.

 

Whereas sinful activity is immediately excused as soon we become fixed up in the four rules and regulations.

 

Since there are always two parties, cheater, those who foolishly let it happen to become cheated and those who support the cheating - all are almost in the same category, demoniac.

[AncientMariner]

 

Horse***t.

 

This is the same mentality that some sannyasins of Srila Prabhupada fell into and they started preaching that really Srila Prabhupada was Krishna and his saying he wasn't was just a device to get jivas attracted to Krishna.

 

Prabhupada booted them out of Iskcon when he found out about it.

 

 

 

Yeah, I agree that it is horse***t. I was being sarcastic because I almost vomit everytime I hear a Vaisnava tell me the crap that I posted of which I have heard quite frequently. I remember Guruvani used to say that kind of thing all the time. Its not that they aren't entitled to their opinions either its that they don't even take into consideration that Prabhupada may really have had admiration for Jesus and they view anyone who doesn't agree with them as an idiot "Hare Christian" like being a "Hare Christian" whatever that means is some sort of terrible thing only reserved for lunatics, degenerates, and idiots the world over.

[AncientMariner]

 

Maybe more to the point he was trying to open up to people what transcendentalism is. Not just some further designation. by bija

 

Wishful thinking. Guruvani used to post crap about Jesus being an ape or something. He always made fun of Jesus and said Prabhupada didn't give a crap about Jesus. Beggar was another one of those devotees who says Prabhupada only said this stuff as a preaching device, don't know what his motivations were in saying that or what his feelings about Jesus really are. I think Kulapavana is another one who will tell you Prabhupada only said this stuff to trick Christians into becoming Hare Krishnas and that Jesus basically sucks and he calls Hare Christians bogus and stuff I think but I don't know for sure. .

 

As far as designations go there is not any Christian group that I have ever been a part of. Only been to church a few times in my life and those were times when I went to church by myself in the middle of the night because I enjoy the solitude. Despite not belonging to any designation I can see the divinity in Jesus and the divinity in Krishna so I don't see why this big controversy even exists except in the fact there seem to be some Vaisnavas that think anyone who has been exposed to Vaisnavism but still thinks Jesus is divine are idiot Hare Christians whatever that means. This all done in the context of numerous quotes from Prabhupada that seem to indicate that Prabhupada at the very least had some level of respect for Jesus and if Prabhupada was sincere in what he said about Jesus, Prabhupada viewed Jesus as a servant of the Lord.

[bija]

Quote:

<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Maybe more to the point he was trying to open up to people what transcendentalism is. Not just some further designation. by bija </td></tr></tbody></table>

Just for the record 'he' in this statement is referring to Srila Prabhupada.

[suchandra]

 

Wishful thinking. Guruvani used to post crap about Jesus being an ape or something.

 

Below Prabhupada says, unless one knows things as they are one shouldnt teach. People who say things without actually knowing are cheaters.

 

Prabhupāda: You must be sure that whatever knowledge you are giving, that is perfect. Then you are teacher.

Mr. Wadell: Well, you see, what you are… In that case, I should have to pretend, you see. I would have to pretend to know something which I did not know at all. Then I should be a cheater, wouldn’t I. And that would be wrong. And there must be many things which I do not know.

Prabhupāda: Yes. It is better to become honest. If I do not know anything perfectly I should not be teacher. That is right thing. And if I have got doubtful knowledge, perhaps, maybe, why shall I be teacher. I should, “No, no I cannot teach. The subject is unknown.” That is our process.

Mr. Wadell: Yes. I must say that I, there are many things of which I haven’t got knowledge.

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is going on. That is going on. Therefore people are misled.

Mr. Wadell: No. I would mislead them more if I said that I knew.

Prabhupāda: No. No, no. If you do not know, why should you say you knew? That is another cheating.

Mr. Wadell: How do you mean?

Prabhupāda: If… When you know…

Mr. Wadell: Oh, yes, I don’t pretend. If I know something, I say I know, but…

Prabhupāda: Then you say that…, you say, “I know.”

Mr. Wadell: But when I do not know something then I admit that I do not know it.

Prabhupāda: Yes. That admission, that’s all right. But in that case, one should not take the post of the teacher. That is our Vedic injunction. One must know perfectly.

Mr. Wadell: You may well be right. (laughter) But actually, I think there are many things which, about which knowledge is changing. There are things…

Prabhupāda: That means cheating.

Mr. Wadell: I see you have here, certain bits of equipment which didn’t exist…

Prabhupāda: That is described in the Vedic literature: andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānāḥ: “A blind man is trying to lead other blind men.”

Mr. Wadell: I suspect that that is as probably very near to the truth of human situation…

Prabhupāda: Yes. Andhā yathāndhair upanīyamānāḥ. What is the benefit? If I am blind and if there are hundreds of blind men, “All right, come on, I shall…”

Mr. Wadell: I think we are all partially blind.

Prabhupāda: No, then there is no question of knowledge. Somebody must be with eyes. He can give knowledge. That is our proposition. As soon as you say blind, there must be somebody with eyes. It is a relative term. It is a relative term. You cannot say, “all are blind.” Then there is no question of blind and with men eyes. As soon as you accept blind man, you must accept the other side, man with eyes.

Mr. Wadell: Oh, I see. You mean just as you distinguish from white, black because it is different…

Prabhupāda: Yes, this is relative world.

Mr. Wadell: I agree, but I am using this in, as an example, not as an absolute description. I think my view—may I explain this—of the whole of which I am, as I say, I think, an imperfect part, a part which is trying to learn something which I am not even quite sure what it is that I am trying to learn…

Prabhupāda: No, no, this is… You are perfect gentleman, means that you say that “I am imperfect.” That is nice. But our point is that from imperfect man, imperfect knowledge is received. We cannot expect perfect knowledge from imperfect man.

Mr. Wadell: No. But where does your perfect knowledge come from and how do you recognize it?

Prabhupāda: Yes, that is very important point, where to get the perfect knowledge. That is wanted. That is intelligence. Therefore the Vedas says, gurum eva abhigacchet: “You go to a guru.” “Guru” means heavy, who knows better than you, or who knows perfect. That is injunction.

Mr. Wadell: But, you see, this is…

Prabhupāda: We have to find out, we have to find out who can give the perfect knowledge.

Mr. Wadell: How do you know that you know? May I ask this? (laughter)

Prabhupāda: Yes, yes.

Mr. Wadell: This is the point which, I would find, you know, without disrespect, this is something which is very difficult, whatever kind of faith you have.

Prabhupāda: It is not the question of faith. Faith may be wrong, belief may be wrong. That perfect knowledge can be received from the perfect source. So God is perfect. God is perfect. And one who follows the path of God, he is also perfect.

 

Conversation with Mr. Wadell

His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

July 10, 1973, London

[AncientMariner]

 

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: rgb(102,102,102) 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Maybe more to the point he was trying to open up to people what transcendentalism is. Not just some further designation. by bija </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Just for the record 'he' in this statement is referring to Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Oh, I see what you are saying. Sorry, I misinterpreted your statement. Definetly agree that it seems Prabhupada was trying to open people up to what transcendentalism is, that is a good point.

[theist]

 

Yeah, I agree that it is horse***t. I was being sarcastic because I almost vomit everytime I hear a Vaisnava tell me the crap that I posted of which I have heard quite frequently. I remember Guruvani used to say that kind of thing all the time. Its not that they aren't entitled to their opinions either its that they don't even take into consideration that Prabhupada may really have had admiration for Jesus and they view anyone who doesn't agree with them as an idiot "Hare Christian" like being a "Hare Christian" whatever that means is some sort of terrible thing only reserved for lunatics, degenerates, and idiots the world over.

 

Oh I see. My apologies AM. I was quite shocked to see that post because from past posts your knowledge on this issue has been crystal clear. For slow folk like myself the sarcastic icon helps. (one of my personal favs BTW)

 

It is a sickening thing whereby some people are trying to turn SP words and thoughts 180 degrees around to match their own. It's criminal.

[suchandra]

 

It is a sickening thing whereby some people are trying to turn SP words and thoughts 180 degrees around to match their own. It's criminal.

This is very important point. If Prabhupada would have spoken in public like this in order to attract Christians to become Vaishnavas, Prabhupada would have clarified his policy in his books, letters, morning walks, conversations with disciples/guests.

 

Especially, when it comes to theological/philosophical questions - the actual situation of succession in Christianity. If there would be something wrong, the succession interrupted, broken, because a succession requires a physical present successor, Prabhupada would have mentioned this in detail.

 

And, would have come to the conclusion, since there is no living successor of Jesus, instead only ritviks, officiating priests, the whole Christian religion is cut off and without effect.

 

Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja and many others acaryas, like Ramanujacarya, never mention anything like this.

 

It should be therefore 100% clear, present policy that we need a living guru to receive genuine diksha is nothing but a concoction of opportunistic Vaishnava institutions, who at the same time walk on thin ice of deriding Lord Jesus by debasing his ritvik system of worship as humbug.

 

It is therefore fully valid what Prabhupada says, it is an aparadha to deride Lord Jesus, the first offense while chanting the Holy Name.

[gHari]

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura in Sri Krsna Samhita:

 

Actually, religious principles followed by people in general are

 

different only due to the different qualifications of the practitioners,

 

but the constitutional religious principles of all living entities are

 

one.

 

 

It is not proper for swanlike persons to reject the religious principles

 

that people in general follow according to their situation. Therefore,

 

with due respect to the religious principles followed by people in

 

general, we will now discuss the living entity's constitutional

 

religious principles.

 

 

From

http://geocities.com/caitanyamahaprabhu/garland1.htm

 

 

 

 

[ranjeetmore]

Actually...you people are starting to lose the staunch faith that every devotee once used to have in Prabhupada...There are so many 'fallen' cases around you all that you are slowly starting to get frustrated...

Actually...i honestly don't think that anyone in iskcon has achieved Prema.Without Prema,NO ONE can become guru.

Aray,you need to see the lord and know His Mind FOR REAL to write books and give lectures....

Prabhupada had achieved Prema...He never fell down..There is NO question only of falling down if you have prema..

Unless you have prema how will you know the Lord's will ?

Scriptural guidance you mite say

Sriman Mahaprabhu met His mother so many times although a sannyasi is forbidden to do so by sastras...His Prema Bhaktas knew the bhava behind the leelas perfectly well.How can a normal devotee who appears 'pure' ever understand that?

 

So please do not think of Prabhupada as just a 'pure' devotee.

 

The most astonishing thing is:

"you can chant constantly only when you think of yourself meaner than a straw on the street." Mahaprabhu said.

So why do we chant without this feeling?

This feeling is NIGH impossible to come without Smaranam of the Lord.How can it even come?

"Bahu janm kare Shravan kirtan,tabhu naahi mile Krsna pade Prema dhon"

Sri Gauranga says,"You do mechanical shravan kirtan for billions of lifetimes...you won't get prema"

He has clearly classified bhakti as Anasanga(Without involvement of the mind/shravanam) and sasanga(with the involvment of mind/shravanam).

We experience it daily whent we chant hare krsna...There's is NO feeling...

Chant with concentration. What concentration?

It means REMEMBER the LORD !!!!!!

Cleansing of the mind is the only task to achieve.Cleansing of the senses automatically happens.

"Manera smaran PRAAN"

Smaranam is the life force of sadhana bhakti.

What is anuraga?

Attachment of the MIND to the lord.NOT the tongue.Attachment of mind implies attachment of the tongue.

 

Herein lies the root bug that has caused the massive deterioration and 'fallen' examples...no sasanga bhakti...Slowly even the intial tears that used to come from our eyes have dried up....If crying is not there,automatically we should understand that we are stunted...No crying...No mercy of the lord.Period.