Advaitins have no understanding of real Vaisnavism

[RadhaMukunda]

The definition of Vaishnava cannot be someone who thinks less of Shiva. That person can never be a vaishnava. This has been reported in many shastras.

[Amlesh]

 

The definition of Vaishnava cannot be someone who thinks less of Shiva. That person can never be a vaishnava. This has been reported in many shastras.

Perfect....

A true Vaishnava however refuses to debate on this issue.

[Amlesh]

 

Nope.

 

Sorry srikanth but you also missed it. Liberation is not the goal of sadhana-bhakti, although of course all practioners desire freedom from birth and death in the beginning. Lord Caitanya prayed for unending devotional service birth after birth. Service to Krishna is the goal not liberation. Which is another way of Suddha-bhakti is the goal of sadhana-bhakti. To such a person liberation is already present but he doesn't really even notice it because he is absorbed in Loving Krishna i.e. Bhakti.

 

A Vaisnava will never accept sayuja. It is hell to them.

 

Until this point is grasped we have no idea what Vaisnavism is.

 

 

Also why the constant need to thrown stones at Iskcon members? I am aware of the deviations and some of the horrors the present leaders have inflicted on Iskcon.

 

On the other hand I am also aware of pious devotional lifestyle of the rank and file devotee in Iskcon. Matching my daily life and their daily lives one quickly sees what's what.

 

It is about 10:00am as I write this. I have not chanted one round on my mala whereas the devotees in the iskcon temple down the street have been up since 3:30 chanting japa, offering puja, dressing the Deities, cleaning the temple and have long since finished a group Bhagavatam class.

 

I am a clump of dirt compared to them. I don't have much good to say about the leadership but there is so much more to Iskcon then them.

 

 

SWEET AS RASSA GULLA.

[Amlesh]

 

"Bhakti starts when Gita classes was over. (amlesh)" --So Cool!

 

Thanks pal.

[Amlesh]

 

Sorry, I disagree. The Advaitin is capable of the highest level of Bhakti possible.

 

Advaita and Bhakti and what else is left to hear.

 

 

The Shaiva or Vaishnava has no special "one-up" over the Advaitin wrt., Bhakti. One who takes the above position either does not understand Bhakti or Advaita or possibly both.

 

Neither Shaivism nor Advaita nor any other thought has the copy right for the word Bhakti.

 

Vaishnavism [i mean pure Vaishnavism, not that depicted by Iskcon or any other school of thought.] only has the reserved right for that.

 

Why I say that, is because.. Iskcon and the likes are still bounded by regulative principles and as such not liberated yet.

PLS, For Vaishnavas only :Read Lord Shiva's encounter with Pracetas and you'll get an idea of what I mean.

But, I guess many won't understand.. it is a very subtle thesis.

 

For other school of thought: Well, friends we have the habit to take God for our servant and pray to them for our betterment.

Well for all other God[.. we choose our God according to our degree of material attachement] praying is offered in order to get... But for Sri Hari, prayers are not infact the real in means but Seva, I mean Service.

 

That's why it is said a real Bhakta is someone who is devoid of all material desires but have that desire to serve Brahman.. of course it's gonna be selfless.

 

Advaita is the Funiest... and how can you associate Bhakti with that.

I can to some extent associate Bhakti with Islam and Christianity but Advaita.. hahahahaha...

 

Let's Analyse...

 

Bhakti englobes 2 words:

1. The Lord, God, Brahman

2. Bhakta

 

Bhakti means abiding and executing God's Order.

 

Now, Advaita means ME = YOU = OTHERS = GOD

 

What I understand is that in your perspective:

 

Bhakti englobes 2 words:

1. Bhakta

2. Bhakta

 

OR

 

Bhakti englobes 2 words:

1. The Lord, God, Brahman

1. The Lord, God, Brahman

 

Who listen to whom and who abides to whom?

 

You talk to yourself, you crazy fellow.

 

Muslims beleive in impersonality but atleast they know they are servants of that Brahman.

 

Hahahaha...... What I can see, you listen to your own whims and I guess, the best way to describe Advaita is ATHEISM.

 

Say directly you are an Atheist.

 

Concering other path which I respect but I've heard to much of disrespect to Vaishnavism and took me out from my sleep...

 

I can say, there is no Bhakti except to Sri Hari.. THE ONLY GOD who came to ORDER and said explicitly DO THIS AND DO THAT AND SHOWED THE WORLD BHAKTI YOGA was NONE OTHER THAN Sri KRISHNA.

 

Gita was not spoken by anyone else except Sri Krishna and he only has that reserved right and no one else.

 

So how come, Bhakti which is a Trade Mark of The Gita is being copyrighted so helplessly by other doctrine.

 

Prove me the Contrary.

 

Now To be Fair.. even then Sri Hari is so SWEET that he says.. Gita is Eternal, I'm Eternal, You are Eternal.. you can Come TO ME AT anytime.

 

No chance to be parochial or blinkered or sectarian.

You have chance birth after birth.. you are always green, pal.

 

ISKCON bhayya log.. show atleast some beauty of Vaishnavism.. you are doing your best to blinker that universal knowledge.

 

 

 

But if you are referring to some kind of Bhakti which ignores the concept of Moksha, then you are in violation of Krishna's diect message in the Gita. Such a concept is also peculiar to Gaudiya Vaishnavism and is rejected by mainstream Vaishnava groups. In which case, the thread should actually be renamed more appropriately as "Dvaita, V-Dvaita Advaita, etc., have no understanding of Gaudiya Vaishnavism".

 

But they do! Everyone knows the Gaudiya position and reject it as false because Gaudiya Vaishnavism is not based on mainstream scripture. ISKCON here means Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

 

http://www.dvaita.org/shaastra/iskcon.shtml

 

Cheers

 

After school there is Job... those fools are still stuck in their school, they are afraid of the battlefield of Kurukshetra.

 

I understand, to abide by Hari's order you need to be fearless and completely fearless. AND who is fearless these days?

 

In the beginning Regulative Principle is observed.. but with that also is needed to be detached with...

 

to be able to see one day Sri Hari face to face.

[srikanthdk71]

 

Nope.

 

Sorry srikanth but you also missed it. Liberation is not the goal of sadhana-bhakti, although of course all practioners desire freedom from birth and death in the beginning. Lord Caitanya prayed for unending devotional service birth after birth. Service to Krishna is the goal not liberation. Which is another way of Suddha-bhakti is the goal of sadhana-bhakti. To such a person liberation is already present but he doesn't really even notice it because he is absorbed in Loving Krishna i.e. Bhakti.

 

Dear Theist, I didnt miss a point. Thats the reason why I putforth my standpoint. I do agree that Bhakti is indeed a clensing act. The saints like Mira,Gora,Gosai Tulsidas, etc is indeed difficult to compahend for a rational mind. On this forum itself I see ppl like Bija with extreme devotion towards his ishtadeva. It is quite emotional. Superb and thrilling coz you arent doing anything for personal gain. The bhakta is taken to a different level by identifying himself lesser and lesser with his physical being and gains siddhi/perform miracles.

 

Now, the yogis on the other hand gains it through meditation and practice called Sadhana. The Gnanis gain it by understanding the Brahman concept and knowing what/where is he and the world. When I use the word 'gain it', I am not pointing towards the siddhis but the level/platform to which all these paths lead are one and the same.

 

When the Astral senses began working on this platform, the Ishtadeva is materialsed to a Bhakta. He is contempt there and doesnt try and go any further, where as for the Gnanis and yogis have the tool to move further. Thats the point differance I was trying to make. A yogis Siddhis or a Gnanis Gnana also will not be of any use onto liberation. He has to leave all identifications to move to the Causal State higher and higher.

 

 

A Vaisnava will never accept sayuja. It is hell to them.

 

He misses the thrill he gets in Sayujya. Thats the sole reason. This means he is clung onto thrilling experiences with his Ishtadeva. Not only Vaishnava. Any ecstatic Bhakta.

 

 

Until this point is grasped we have no idea what Vaisnavism is.

 

And until the aforesaid points are grasped, we have no idea what Advaita is.

 

 

Also why the constant need to thrown stones at Iskcon members?

 

There is a saying in Hindi 'Eent ke Jawab Patthar Se'. You can yourself search the whole forum and know who has collected how many stones thrown at them.

 

 

On the other hand I am also aware of pious devotional lifestyle of the rank and file devotee in Iskcon. Matching my daily life and their daily lives one quickly sees what's what.

 

It is about 10:00am as I write this. I have not chanted one round on my mala whereas the devotees in the iskcon temple down the street have been up since 3:30 chanting japa, offering puja, dressing the Deities, cleaning the temple and have long since finished a group Bhagavatam class.

 

I am a clump of dirt compared to them. I don't have much good to say about the leadership but there is so much more to Iskcon then them.

 

Why do you reduce yourself to a clump of dirt. Your responsibilities has limited you to be what you are. An inmate of any temple is just following the rules. Have you asked the Iskonites what happens to them if they sleep till 7.00am one day? You are lucky. Can anyone do any of your duties at the times you do? No. Only you can do it. Thats the reason why our scriptures teach us to live like a leader and not as a follower. Lead yourself. The rest will flow and follow.

[Amlesh]

Bhakti is not a cleansing process.

 

It is achieved only after attaining Purity.

[gokulkr]

Actually there are 4 advaithas :

 

1. Kaivala advaitha (By Sri Sankara) [impure Monoism]

2. Suddha advaitha (By Sri Vishnuswami) [Pure Monoism]

3. Vishista advaitha (By Sri Ramanujacharya) [Qualified Monoism]

4. Dvaita advaitha (By Sri Nimarkacharya) [Dualistic Monoism]

 

[ of course since Sri Madhvacharya didnt accepetd monoism i didnt included his philosophy ].

 

All these folds preach monoism ie., advaitha in their own way. But many people are in the illusion that Kaivala advaitha is the only advaitha. They forgot other three forget advaitha folds. Other three folds are also advaitha and people who follow are also advaitins.

 

Moreover, people who follow other three advaitha folds are mostly vaishnavas. So its foolish tell vaishnavas dont follow advaitha or they dont understand advaita.

 

Also such people who make fun of vaishnavas can read "Vedantha Sangraha" (by sri ramanujacharya) and respective philosophy works of other two advaitha faiths so that one will know that except Madhvas all vaishnavas accept and follow advaita.

 

Om Namo Narayanaya

Om Srimathe Ramanujaya

Pujyaya Sri Guru Raghavendraya

[Amlesh]

 

Some see Arjuna as having his sense of duty restored by Krishna and turned into detached Karma-yogi in the process.

 

Others see Arjuna gaining a firm attachment to pleasing Krishna which includes as a secondary consideration detachment from matter, iow Bhakti.

 

"......inaction in action...."

 

nice vision.

Indeed, he was no longer working for his own whims.

 

Perfectly said Theist, the Work executed under Hari's order is indeed free from secondary considerations. Arjuna did not see his uncle and brothers there... he was indeed materially free from the conception of life.. though engaged in WAR.

 

Though acting, still he does not act.. it explains well the Gita Maxim "The soul never does."

[kaisersose]

OMG! here we go again...

 

 

Neither Shaivism nor Advaita nor any other thought has the copy right for the word Bhakti.

Vaishnavism [i mean pure Vaishnavism, not that depicted by Iskcon or any other school of thought.] only has the reserved right for that.

 

Means nothing. One can just as easily say,

 

You are wrong. Only Pure Shaivism has the right to the word Bhakti. The above claim is spurious, no better than some iskcon folks in Australia

trying to copyright the Hare Krishna mantra. And not just me, ISKCON, the Dvaita school, the Vishishtadvaita school and just about every one in the world would reject your concept as absurd.

 

 

But, I guess many won't understand.. it is a very subtle thesis.

Or perhaps they don't understand because it is pure nonsense? This makes a lot more sense to me.

 

 

Advaita is the Funiest... and how can you associate Bhakti with that.

 

You can, if you spend sometime to know what Advaita is, which you clearly haven't, as will be evident shortly.

 

 

Let's Analyse...

Bhakti englobes 2 words:

1. The Lord, God, Brahman

2. Bhakta

Bhakti means abiding and executing God's Order.

 

Correct. This may well be the only correct piece of information you have ever posted on this forum till date.

 

 

Now, Advaita means ME = YOU = OTHERS = GOD

 

Wrong, of course. Clearly shows you do not know the first thing about Advaita. The usual challenge of "produce a quote by Shankara to back your statement up or else it is dismissed as Hare Krishna/Prabhupada nonsense" applies. As the rest of your post is based on this false premise, it is dismissed as junk as well. Again, produce a valid quote from Shankara and you will be taken seriously.

 

Though you mock ISKCON a lot, you are no better than the stereotype iskconite in anyway. The same shortcomings found in the narrow minded, ignorant Hare Krishna are seen in you too. You display the same levels of ignorance (and arrogance) as they do. So you would be better off admitting you are no different from them, instead of mocking them and pretending to be somehow better.

 

And please spare us your drivel on Advaita. We have heard the same nonsense from Hare Krishnas here for far too long. Be creative and find something new - especially as you claim to be "better" than them.

 

Cheers

[Amlesh]

 

OMG! here we go again...

 

Who God? yourself or me or others.`

 

 

Means nothing. One can just as easily say,

 

No depth in your sayings. Mine was logical.

 

 

You are wrong. Only Pure Shaivism has the right to the word Bhakti. The above claim is spurious, no better than some iskcon folks in Australia

trying to copyright the Hare Krishna mantra. And not just me, ISKCON, the Dvaita school, the Vishishtadvaita school and just about every one in the world would reject your concept as absurd.

 

Atleast I gave some materials to support. you just deny with a full stop.

 

What yaar? Give me some of your logic as well.

 

 

And not just me, ISKCON, the Dvaita school, the Vishishtadvaita school and just about every one in the world would reject your concept as absurd.

 

hahahahah.....

 

 

Or perhaps they don't understand because it is pure nonsense? This makes a lot more sense to me.

 

When nothing is left to say... this is what we get as answer. All your dialogues[rubbish] from your repertoire is over or what.

 

 

 

You can, if you spend sometime to know what Advaita is, which you clearly haven't, as will be evident shortly.

 

What do you have to say about it.

Sprout your misinterpretation of the already misinterpreted vedic knowledge.

I've said quite a bit concerning Vaishnavism.

Enlighten me dude.... I've seen you posing questions a lot about vaishnavism... let me also enjoy.

 

 

Correct. This may well be the only correct piece of information you have ever posted on this forum till date.

 

Ok thanks.. this means I'm better than you...

Cause till date, you've sprouted only rubbish... I've lost all patience and expectation to hear something good from you:P

 

 

Wrong, of course. Clearly shows you do not know the first thing about Advaita. The usual challenge of "produce a quote by Shankara to back your statement up or else it is dismissed as Hare Krishna/Prabhupada nonsense" applies. As the rest of your post is based on this false premise, it is dismissed as junk as well.

 

Well when Krishna is missing in the scenario then good can be expected but not the best.

 

 

Again, produce a valid quota from Shankara and you will be taken seriously.

 

Ok, I'll quote from Sankara... "Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam Tad mudhaha"...

 

According to what I can derive with deep reflection and study... it means "Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam Tad Kaisersose".

 

Ok, atleast take that seriously.

 

 

Though you mock ISKCON a lot, you are no different from the stereotype iskconite in anyway. The same shortcomings found in the narrow minded, ignorant Hare Krishna are seen in you too. You display the same levels of ignorance (and arrogance) as they do. So you would be better off admitting you are no different from them, instead of mocking them and pretending to be somehow better.

 

When I say something, I become arrogant.

All of you here are people seeking spiritual knowledge, right?

So I guess you won't get offended since it is what taught by spirituality.

 

Take for example I'm sure you'll not get offended.. I'll give from the quote of Sri Shankara the meanning of

 

mudhaha = Great Ass = kaisersose

 

I'm sure you are fine with that.. and more sure you are not at all affected.

 

 

And please spare us your drivel on Advaita. We have heard the same nonsense from Hare Krishnas here for far too long. Be creative and find something new - especially as you claim to be "better" than them.

Cheers

 

Let us here that from you and dissipate my ignorance.

If You are able to give me the best out of Sariraka bhasya, I guess you'll increase my ignorance rather than dissipate.

[Amlesh]

You are the biggest rascal I know, Kaisersose.

Why did you put Iskcon in the middle of my talk with you.

 

You are speaking as if you are a great supporter of theirs.

 

What was your implication of that you donkey?

[kaisersose]

 

No depth in your sayings. Mine was logical.

And I can say the same thing - My post was logical; yours was shallow and incorrect. This is what will happen when you make unfounded statements. In future, hopefully, you will avoid sweeping statements about the glory of your own brand of religion with no evidence to back it up.

 

 

Atleast I gave some materials to support. you just deny with a full stop.

You have given zero material, till date. You deride direct and simple messages from the Gita with your own "personal" concoctions. You assume you know Advaita without reading a single line of it. And as you are the one picking faults with Advaita, the burden of proof is on you to find evidence to support your allegations. It is simple logic. There are some idiots here who have been repeating the same nonsense about Advaita over and over again for years without evidence. They cannot keep their noses out of the topic and it appears you just joined that bandwagon.

 

 

Ok, I'll quote from Sankara... "Bhaja Govindam Bhaja Govindam Tad mudhaha"...

Nothing in that quote says I = you = God, which was your thesis. Hence the dismissal stands. Ironically, you have quoted a Bhakti verse from an Advaitin and yet you laughed at the relation between Advaita and Bhakti in your previous post. Just one example of how confused your understanding of Advaita is.

 

The rest of your post is trash, as usual. I would expect much better from someone who claims to have a "direct relation with Krishna, unlike the rest of the people on this forum". If you intend to criticize Advaita and get away with it, you will have to do a lot better than this. Or of course, you can stay out of topics that you know nothing about - the sensible option.

 

Cheers

[Amlesh]

Anyways.. I'll not spend my time uselessly on that.

 

I'll have to write something about Svadharma later on.

 

Ciao, Kaisersose.

[Amlesh]

 

And I can say the same thing - My post was logical; yours was shallow and incorrect. This is what will happen when you make unfounded statements. In future, hopefully, you will avoid sweeping statements about the glory of your own brand of religion with no evidence to back it up.

 

And what was ever posted by you?

 

 

You have given zero material, till date. You deride direct and simple messages from the Gita with your own "personal" concoctions. You assume you know Advaita without reading a single line of it. And as you are the one picking faults with Advaita, the burden of proof is on you to find evidence to support your allegations. It is simple logic. There are some idiots here who have been repeating the same nonsense about Advaita over and over again for years without evidence. They cannot keep their noses out of the topic and it appears you just joined that bandwagon.

 

And since when Gita was so easy to decipher.

The Author of Gita himself said it's a supreme secret.

And what is so direct about a secret... it is infact mysterious.

 

 

Nothing in that quote says I = you = God, which was your thesis. Hence the dismissal stands. Ironically, you have quoted a Bahkti verse from an Advaitin and yet you laughed at the relation between Advaita and Bhakti in your previous post. Just one example of how confused your understanding of Advaita is.

 

Again with your saying it is good or not good.

When you'll explain?

 

Who said Shankara is an Advaitin?

 

In fact when many people were losing faith in Hinduism, he came to divert them back to Vedic culture but in a really cunning way.

 

He did not come to explain those who were already following Hindu Culture.

 

Vaishnavas were there from time immemorial.

 

 

The rest of your post is trash, as usual. If you intend to criticize Advaita and get away with it, you will have to do a lot better than this. Or of course, you can stay out of topics that you know nothing about - the sensible option.

 

Cheers

In fact me too I beleive in Oneness but in a threaded way.

 

same to you yaar, with your bull shit questions on Vaishnavism.

 

What to do better.. what it is there to kill in an already dead philosophy.

[bhaktajan]

Lord Çré Kåñëa is the property of His pure unconditional devotees, and as such only the devotees can deliver Kåñëa to another devotee; Kåñëa is never obtainable directly.

Lord Caitanya therefore designated Himself as gopé-bhartuù pada-kamalayor däsa-däsänudäsaù, or “the most obedient servant of the servants of the Lord, who maintains the gopé damsels at Våndävana.”

A pure devotee therefore never approaches the Lord directly, but tries to please the servant of the Lord’s servants, and thus the Lord becomes pleased, and only then can the devotee relish the taste of the tulasé leaves stuck to His lotus feet.

In the Brahma-saàhitä it is said that the Lord is never to be found by becoming a great scholar of the Vedic literatures, but He is very easily approachable through His pure devotee.

In Våndävana all the pure devotees pray for the mercy of Çrématé Rädhäräëé, the pleasure potency of Lord Kåñëa. Çrématé Rädhäräëé is a tenderhearted feminine counterpart of the supreme whole, resembling the perfectional stage of the worldly feminine nature.

Therefore, the mercy of Rädhäräëé is available very readily to the sincere devotees, and once She recommends such a devotee to Lord Kåñëa, the Lord at once accepts the devotee’s admittance into His association.

The conclusion is, therefore, that one should be more serious about seeking the mercy of the devotee than that of the Lord directly, and by one’s doing so (by the good will of the devotee) the natural attraction for the service of the Lord will be revived.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

 

 

 

nähaà vipro na ca nara-patir näpi vaiçyo na çüdro

 

 

 

 

nähaà varëé na ca gåha-patir no vana-stho yatir vä

 

kintu prodyan nikhila-paramänanda-pürëämåtäbdher

 

gopé-bhartuù pada-kamalayor däsa-däsänudäsaù

(verse 63 [or 74 ?] of Padyävalé by Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“I am not a brähmaëa, kñatriya, vaiçya or çüdra. I am not a brahmacäré, gåhastha, vänaprastha or sannyäsé. What am I? I am the eternal servant of the servant of the servant of Lord Kåñëa.” Through the disciplic succession, one can attain this conclusion, which is perfect elevation to the transcendental platform.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bhagavata-purana 6.11.24:

"O my Lord, O Supreme Personality of Godhead, will I again be; able to be a servant of Your eternal servants who find shelter only at Your lotus feet? O Lord of my life, may I again become their servant so that my mind may always think of Your transcendental attributes, my words always glorify those attributes, and my body always engage in the loving service of Your Lordship?"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This verse gives the sum and substance of devotional life. One must first become a servant of the servant of the servant of the Lord (däsänudäsa).

 

 

 

 

 

Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu advised, and He also showed by His own example, that a living entity should always desire to be a servant of the servant of the servant of Kåñëa, the maintainer of the gopés (gopé-bhartuù pada-kamalayor däsa-däsänudäsaù).

This means that one must accept a spiritual master who comes in the disciplic succession and is a servant of the servant of the Lord. Under his direction, one must then engage one’s three properties, namely his body, mind and words.

The body should be engaged in physical activity under the order of the master, the mind should think of Kåñëa incessantly, and one’s words should be engaged in preaching the glories of the Lord. If one is thus engaged in the loving service of the Lord, one’s life is successful.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bhagavata-purana SB 7.9.42

The boy Prahläda Mahäräja said:

"O my Lord, O Supreme Personality of Godhead, original spiritual master of the entire world, what is the difficulty for You, who manage the affairs of the universe, in delivering the fallen souls engaged in Your devotional service? You are the friend of all suffering humanity, and for great personalities it is necessary to show mercy to the foolish. Therefore I think that You will show Your causeless mercy to persons like us, who engage in Your service."

 

 

 

 

 

Here the words priya janän anusevatäà naù indicate that the Supreme Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is very favorable to devotees who act according to the instructions of His own pure devotee. In other words, one must become the servant of the servant of the servant of the Lord. If one wants to become the servant of the Lord directly, this is not as fruitful as engaging in the service of the Lord’s servant. This is the direction of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, who shows us the way to become gopé-bhartuù pada-kamalayor däsa-däsänudäsaù. One should not be proud of becoming directly the servant of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Rather, one must seek a pure devotee, a servant of the Lord, and engage oneself in the service of such a servant. The more one becomes the servant of the servant, the more one becomes perfect in devotional service. This is also the injunction of Bhagavad-gétä: evaà paramparä-präptam imaà räjarñayo viduù [bg. 4.2]. One can understand the science of the Supreme Personality of Godhead simply by the paramparä system. In this regard, Çréla Narottama däsa Öhäkura says, täìdera caraëa sevi bhakta-sane väsa: “Let me serve the lotus feet of the devotees of the Lord, and let me live with devotees.” Janame janame haya, ei abhiläña. Following Narottama däsa Öhäkura, one should aspire to be a servant of the Lord’s servant, life after life. Çréla Bhaktivinoda Öhäkura also sings, tumi ta’ öhäkura, tomära kukura, baliyä jänaha more: “O my Lord, O Vaiñëava, please consider me your dog.” One must become the dog of a Vaiñëava, a pure devotee, for a pure devotee can deliver Kåñëa without difficulty. Kåñëa se tomära, kåñëa dite pära. Kåñëa is the property of His pure devotee, and if we take shelter of a pure devotee, he can deliver Kåñëa very easily. Prahläda wants to engage in the service of a devotee, and therefore he prays to Kåñëa, “My dear Lord, kindly give me the shelter of Your very dear devotee so that I may engage in his service and You may then be pleased.” Mad-bhakta-püjäbhyadhikä (Bhäg. 11.19.21). The Lord says, “Engaging in the service of My devotee is better than trying to engage in My devotional service.”

Another significant point in this verse is that by devotional service Prahläda Mahäräja does not want to benefit alone. Rather, he prays to the Lord that all of us fallen souls in this material world may, by the grace of the Lord, engage in the service of His servant and thus be delivered. The grace of the Lord is not at all difficult for the Lord to bestow, and thus Prahläda Mahäräja wants to save the whole world by spreading Kåñëa consciousness.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The living entity is äçraya, always subordinate, and the Supreme Personality of Godhead is viñaya, the supreme objective, the goal of life. Unfortunate persons trapped in this material world do not know this. Na te viduù svärtha-gatià hi viñëum: [bhagavata-purana 7.5.31] illusioned by the material energy, everyone in this material world is unaware that the only aim of life is to approach Lord Viñëu.

 

 

 

ärädhanänäà sarveñäà

 

 

 

 

viñëor ärädhanaà param

 

tasmät parataraà devi

 

tadéyänäà samarcanam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In the Padma Puräëa Lord Çiva explains to his wife, Parvaté, the goddess Durgä, that the highest goal of life is to satisfy Lord Viñëu, who can be satisfied only when His servant is satisfied. Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu therefore teaches, gopé-bhartuù pada-kamalayor däsa-däsänudäsaù. One must become a servant of the servant. Prahläda Mahäräja also prayed to Lord Nåsiàhadeva that he might be engaged as the servant of the Lord’s servant. This is the prescribed method of devotional service. As soon as a devotee wants the Supreme Personality of Godhead to be his order supplier, the Lord immediately refuses to become the master of such a motivated devotee. In Bhagavad-gétä [4.11] the Lord says, ye yathä mäà prapadyante täàs tathaiva bhajämy aham. “As one surrenders unto Me, I reward him accordingly.” Materialistic persons are generally inclined to material profits. As long as one continues in such an adulterated position, he does not receive the benefit of returning home, back to Godhead.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[ranjeetmore]

very true indeed!!! Very true Indeed!

First do Harijan seva.Then only will we get Hari seva.

[Amlesh]

SVADHARMA

Before starting with the explanation concerning Swadharma, the basic concepts of the Varnashrama Dharma should be at least known.

The concepts of the Vedas as well as that of Upanishadic tendencies should be perfectly known.. if not it is impossible to understand the deep rooted meaning of Swadharma.

But to understand the damn complicated subtleties surrounding Swadharma is even more difficult.

The maxim of the Gita like

1. "The soul never does",

2. "Karmani evadhikaraste..."

3. "One who sees action in inaction and inaction is action really sees"

4. "no one kills and no one dies"

surrounds or is directly or indirectly connected with that concept.

 

Secondly: One should know for sure that THE Author of the Gita has drawn no line of demarcation between salvation and worldly pursuits. Au contraire, Il a montre que "Religion must rule even our worldly pursuits."

 

As an explanation of this exposee, i should say that it concurs with the watch-word of the ISA Upanishad "enjoy through renunciation".

Had the Gita been cent per cent an extremist concerning the outward practice of renunciation, Sri Krishna could have permitted Arjuna to become a mendicant on the battlefield itself and there could have been no eruption as an opportunity to expound the Gita.

 

The gita exhorts that what is to be renounced is not social or political activity but the fruit of desire itself while performing activity.

 

 

Et encore, verily the Gita, which rejects nothing and puts every orthodoxical school of philosophy in its proper place, throws light on the temporal affairs also.

 

Comme dicte par le Professeur, Monsieur RadhaKrishnan "while the chief value of religion lies in its power to enlarge the internal man, its soundness is not complete until it has shaped properly his external existence. For the latter we require a sound political, economic and social life, a power and efficiency which will make a people not only survice but grow towards collective perfection."

 

Now coming to try to have a close translation of Swadharma in that really stupid English language [it should be noted that Sanskrit is the only perfect language], I should say we call it by "detached activity". It is very sad indeed for me to say that it has lost as the 3 following words will suggest - LOST IN TRANSLATION.

 

Swadharma according to my very very very ..... very dear and SWEET LORD, the ONE AND ONLY SRI KRISHNA means "The Outward performance of actions in combination with the Inward renunciation of the world."

 

That is better explained by Sri Ram himself when he says "Karmani evadhkaraste maa phalesu kadachana" meaning "Tu kaam karta ja, phal ka chinta mat kar.. Usspe adhikaar sirf mera hein"... in Hindi.. I love hindi btw.

In English "You have the right in your Duty but not its fruits and only I have the right over that..."

In French "Forget it you won't understand"... sorry.. hehe.. i like to joke from time to time...

 

The word Akarma I suppose fits the best here... "That action which yields neither +ve or -ve reaction, since it is a surrendered action and the architect of this work is not oneself but the Lord. The mastermind is the one who collects that fruit...IOW, Yajna."

I suppose, the one reading those words should also know Karma and Vikarma for a better understanding of what I've just said.

 

In Upanishadic thought, the spiritual life of the individual and his secular activity stand apart from each other. Pointing out that the upanishadic concept of self-perfection itself is not final, Prof. Balbir Singh felt that apart from seeking self-perfection, the self "needed to be awakened, enlightened and strengthened, since it was the social group itself that expresses the same divine form the realisation of which as his own constituted the essence and substance of all his activity." That is why it is said that soul is very very rare.

The Gita bridges the gulf between the individual self and the social self by means of its detached activity, which is at once both individual and social, spiritual and secular, in nature.

 

The Gita disjuncted the concept of Moksha from the concept of hierarchical rebirth cycles and linked it with ethical behaviour and honest pursuit of one's own occupation.

 

Krishna gave Arjuna assurance that such a kind of fight would not incur sin. The promise of the Divine intervention to punish the wicked, protect the virtous and establish the righteous society also conveys the message of the disinterested activity of the Divine Being.

 

Detached activity is neutral and consititutes the basis of constructive social and political reform [or any other reform depending on one's Varnashrama dharma]. It is based on the initiative of the individual who acts with a selfless desire to make society dynamic. He himself works and sets on example for others to follow. It is growth-oriented, spreads from person to person and permeates the entire society. The detached individual decides the form of his activity depending on time, necessity and circumstances in society.

 

Well, there are a hell lot to say about that.. and I'm tired.

 

I should before enclosing that say.. nothing will be possible if SRI RAM is not known to be residing in OUR HEART and that AVADH BIHARI who become our mind,heart and soul and HE is that Supreme Director that makes that sanctioned.

[Amlesh]

However, by words it is a big pity to say that my saying in trying to elaborate Swardharma of the Gita is really incomplete.

 

The only who knows it best is Sri Hari.. and He is the only one capable transfering that meaning in completeness.

 

I'm helpless.. though by his grace I know but telling without Hari's communication channel activation is like "storing water in a tank with a hole."

Last but not the least, neither Iskcon nor anyother school of thought can really help, if the mind and heart itself is not clean.

Hari likes people without duplicity.

I don't really know when I'll get his Mercy.. but I'm at the always at the Chaukat of Lord Shiva and Sri Hanuman, imploring them for that mercy.

Anyone criticizing Lord Shiva or any other deity will get nice encounters with me be it a so-called Vaishnavas also, concering Truth, my only friends are those who abide by that.. and you all know how ruthless I am in debates:P

 

So not necessary to pinpoint one or one group and say I hate that.

Sorry, I don't hate anyone.. I just like to play the game... since everyone here are the first to prowl their intelligence.

 

It is really pathetic when I hear "Hey that does not mean I should give up my intelligence"

Since when it was your intelligence beta?

Vishnu's maya has just not started playing with you in this birth ruthlessly, that's why you say that.

If you are able to get that, it will be kripa on you only.

hahahahahahahahah.........

[theist]

I would be happy if the advaitins here would simply understand that we are saying something different then what they think we are and quit trying to claim their path can contain true Bhakti.

 

No problem that are our paths have different goals, just see it and admit it.