I think i am completely wrong about God, being atheist sucks

[jeffster]

Hello Kaiserose,

Since the jiva has minute independence, he can choose his own course. That is the definition of free will. The wise jivas chose to serve in the kingdom of God. The unwise jivas chose to attempt to dominate, to be false lords, within the confines of matter, or within the confines of misconception, if you prefer. The concomittant distresses within the confines of matter you know from your study of Bhagavat philosophy to be janma, mrityu, jara, vyadi - birth, death, old age and disease. The choice was ours, therefore how can we blame God if we made a wrong choice and are now suffering because of it? Krishna cannot demand our love because love demanded is not love. Love must be freely given. Therefore He endowed us with free will, with minute independence, with the ability to choose to love and serve Him or to serve maya. Either way, serve we must. The choice is still ours; therefore if we choose to end the suffering, we can surrender. You are attempting to blame God for suffering, but if blame must be placed, I blame you and me for our own suffering. We have caused our own suffering through our own ignorance and foolishness. We must accept personal responsibility for it, surrender, and do what we know we must to become reinstated in Krishna's grace and return to His loka.

Regards, jeffster/AMd

[raghu]

 

This should certainly be the case if the world and the individual continue to exist after Liberation. As long as the world exists the way we know it now, pain & suffering exist too. And the only way the Liberated soul can be situated in a state of pure bliss is to either be unaware of this ongoing suffering or be aware, but completely detached (P1).

 

Prior to liberation, the liberated souls have likely experienced countless lifetimes with the same kind of suffering that is experienced by those who remain in bondage. I don't see it is a problem if (after liberation) they were made unaware of the suffering of those remaining in bondage. After all, they went through it too.

 

On the flip side, I remember reading in some gaudiya writings somewhere that the liberated jIva-s do experience bliss except and save for their compassion for the souls who remain in bondage. I don't remember exactly, but I seem to recall that they considered that even this compassion did not take away from their bliss somehow. This sounds like something one of the gosvamis would write.

 

Not that I am taking a position one way or another. I think it is an interesting question.

 

 

The simple answer is, the Advaita concept of Liberation does not create situation P1 as explained above. And since they claim a blissful state on Liberation too , their concept of of bliss is less taxing on the brain than in P1.

 

I don’t see how. On Liberation, it is Jagat Mithya. Not just from that point of time, but the whole concept of duality never existed. Like I said, it is a real end to pain and suffering, which is not necessarily the case when the world continues to exist even after Liberation.

 

Again, I am not advocating Advaita.

 

Certainly one can exempt Advaita's concept of liberation from the criticism since world never existed. But the other problems remain - who gets liberation? Everyone or just a few? Why the difference? Is the experience of suffering real? Why or why not? How can bondage be real if world is not actually real? These seem like far more significant problems with that worldview than the question of the nature of bliss.

 

And here is the problem. If we say God was not the creator and that he has no role in our daily lives, then he pretty much has no role at all!

 

The whole logic of seeking Liberation is called into question. Why should I seek Hari and Liberation? Anyway, nothing is going to change in my lifetime. And if I fail and am born again, then I have no recollection of the past anyway and so it does not matter (The slate is erased clean). That guy (my next life) does not know me nor my lofty goals nor the pain and sufferings that I see around me. He has no conceivable relation to me at all. Any pain & suffering he sees will be all new to him.

 

The point I am making is, if Krishna does not play a role in this very lifetime, then I fail to see the point of seeking Krishna (as Ranjeet was proposing earlier) for a time when I will have no recollection of this life and my reasons for seeking him.

 

Let us take parenting as a crude example. Good parenting does not mean constantly controlling your children so as to keep them from making any mistake. Nor does it mean being totally apathetic. There has to be a balance between the two extremes, or else the child will not learn what is actually right and what are the consequences of wrong actions. The Vedantic position has always been that Brahman is impartial and yet bestows His grace on the jIva who seeks Him. Without turning to Him, the jIva is like the bird in the tree who enjoys or suffers endlessly according to his activities. He has got the freedom to do as he wishes but also reaps the fruit of his actions. Eventually, he may learn that trying to enjoy separately from the Lord is merely causing his endless suffering, just as a child gradually learns that bad behavior leads to bad consequences and opts for a path of good behavior. If the Lord forced every jIva to turn towards him then there would be no question of free will, and the very nature of our individual existence would be meaningless.

 

As far as forgetting one's past experience in bondage, I suppose this all gets back to how we define ourselves as individuals. If you define yourself by your previous experiences, then I can see how a liberated state in which you forget your past life experiences might be troubling. But then, if you accept the point of view that our identities as individual units of consciousness are not reducible to merely the experience of memories, the ability to remember one's past is not really that important.

 

 

The atheist is not angry at God (you got that mixed up). That would be a paradox.

 

That is indeed a paradox, but it is a fact that many self-proclaimed atheists are angry at God. But if someone is truly an atheist, there should be no question of being angry with God since he does not accept the existence of God (though I can understand anger with organized religion, anger with religious leaders, etc).

 

 

I said, if I were a theist, I would be angry. Because then, there is an all-mighty God and he is not lifting a finger to help, which is orthogonal to most people around us. We would all help to whatever extent we can. I would have a lot of questions about the validity of my beliefs, etc.

But as an atheist, since there is no one who can do anything about this (beyond us humans), the aforementioned problems no longer exist. This is the way things are and we do what we can to make them better and if not, we live with it. It is easier to do this, as there is no rationale behind our existence anyway.

 

Cheers

 

I consider myself a theist, and I honestly do not find troubling the idea of a compassionate all-powerful God existing side by side with a world full of suffering. Just as in the atheist's worldview, we have to accept that enjoyment or suffering are the products of human behaviors. If God exists, we can't assume that He is going to step in and stop all suffering simply by virtue of His existence, any more than a parent is going to do our homework for us, or a gardener is going to be responsible for the welfare of ants living peacefully in an anthill next to his land.

 

Basic problem behind most lay criticism of religion, in my opinion, is that critics accept many basic assumptions specific to Abrahamic religions (i.e. the idea of creation by God, and hence God's direct responsibility for all human affairs) and have a hard time getting out of that worldview when considering the problems of God, existence, salvation, etc.

[AncientMariner]

I have had my struggles and troubles with Krishna mainly because Iskcon does not seem like a credible organization to me, maybe someday it will be. Another obstacle has been the fact that there seem to be a lot of Christ hating Hare Krishnas at times. I can understand hating Christianity because it can be a very frustrating religion to deal with. Christians get glimpses of the divine but then dismiss any other approach to the divine as satanic or new age, that shit is frustrating as hell to deal with but ultimately I try to respect the glimpses of the divine that the Christians are getting. As far as the life of Jesus the way he lived his life is divine so I can appreciate the divinity of Jesus anyday.

 

 

No matter how much struggle I might have with Krishna and following all of His rules I do think Krishna is real. When I reflect on my life I can see that Krishna is there as the supersoul at every instance and every little decision you make etc. he is there overseeing and trying to guide. Chanting is powerful and I firmly believe your destiny becomes better and better the more you chant and the more you fine tune your being to be in harmony with the rules and regulations of Krishna Consciousness.

[gokulkr]

 

Hi ,

maybe it is the tough economic times or maybe it is my own fearfulness or maybe my financial status right about now, but I am in a deep ditch, which I wasn't when I wasn't atheist lets say. I was happy atleast, now all I have is depression and anxiety. Fear has taken complete hold of me, everyday as I see myself go into more and more debt, all I can find comfort in is this book bhagavad gita, and prabhupada's words, ironically. The same words that I actually forbid myself from reading, those same ideas of surrender, which were once given up by me, I made my self believe that there is no God, then how can these words give me this type of comfort, I am still convinced that if there is God, he would be more visible. Anyway, atheism truly makes one miserable, maybe there is a better way.

 

You may not remember me, but anyway sorry for any offense I had created earlier as an atheistic moron.

 

prabuji,

in your current situation its seems you need first comfort and remove fear. There is our dear guru Raghavendraswami sitting at Mantralaya ready to end the sufferings and give comfort. Visit Mantralaya, cry before him. Rayaru will end your sufferings and Rayaruji will also make sure that you will reach lotus feet of Venkateswara. Its always good to approach thru guru. Also read narasimha mantra raja pada stotra. lord Narasimha is the original Bhoolenath. he is the one who has send Rayaru to this world to take care of us. Worship them both. thats the best. After you have become confident then you can go for more deep into spiritual path with guidance of rayaru.

God never wants to see his devotees suffer. Thats why he has send rayaru and he is also standing in Tirumala for us.

[melvin]

The only good thing in being an atheist is that one doesn`t have to worry if he attends Sunday mass, confesses his sins or receives holy communion or not.

[Narasingh]

 

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

Why did Krishna create misery and suffering in the first place?

 

Even after you attain Krishna, the pain and misery in the world will still persist as before. Infants will starve to death in Africa, civilians will be slaughtered daily in the Congo and kids will be kidnapped and blinded to send them out to beg in Mumbai (a la slumdog millionaire).

 

So for you to be blissful with Krishna, Krishna should erase all these memories from you and make you think (wrongly) that there is no pain and suffering in the world and keep you in ignorance. Or he should alter your genetic makeup to remove the compassion gene - that makes you feel for someone else's pain. If that happens, they you can be in bliss with no regard for the continued suffering on planet earth.

 

Advaita offers a better solution as duality ends , really ending suffering in its true sense ( Not endorsing Advaita, for all the Mayavada bashers out there).

 

If I were a theist, I would be angered at a God for creating an unfair world, with the troubles in Congo, Iraq and countless other places. Especially more so, when you hear some idiots claiming this is all a "sport". I would tell them to stop speaking nonsense unless they are willing to get blinded and beg on the streets for the rest of their lives - all as part of the "sport". Or alternatively, we can take this sport angle seriously if the starving people of the world are also willing to call their suffering a sport. As an atheist, it is relatively easier to deal with the situation as there is no source and therefore no one to blame.

 

Cheers

All things are created for a purpose. If there were no sorrow, would you know joy? Erase sorrow and you will erase its coefficient--joy.

[Narasingh]

The environment is friendly. Our perspective is distorted.

[kaisersose]

 

The environment is friendly. Our perspective is distorted.

 

Again, the starving, homeless guy in Congo who just witnessed his family slaughtered, is going to disagree with you on this. If I go tell him that he is suffering because his "perspective is distorted", he will spit in my face.

 

It is easy for you and me to engage in idle speculate about how everything is just fine, a sport of the Lord, etc., because we have enough to eat, a roof on the head, our people are safe, there is no danger of raiding militants or Cholera, not to mention enough time to waste on discussion forums, etc.

 

I have tons to say on the topic, but as I said before, this is an inappropriate discussion on a spiritual forum and so I do not want to.

 

Cheers

[jeffster]

Kaiserose,

You keep missing the point about personal responsibility. We have only ourselves to blame for this excursion through the mayic realms. Whether you like it or not, that's the reality of the situation. Perhaps you should start a mission to Congo, preaching that they should all chant Hare Krishna to ultimately end their suffering by winding down their sojourn through samsara. You can also get purified, then take the issue up directly, face-to-face with Krishna. Paradoxically, if you became purified, you wouldn't have to ask Krishna this question.

jeffster/AMd

[Narasingh]

 

Again, the starving, homeless guy in Congo who just witnessed his family slaughtered, is going to disagree with you on this. If I go tell him that he is suffering because his "perspective is distorted", he will spit in my face.

 

It is easy for you and me to engage in idle speculate about how everything is just fine, a sport of the Lord, etc., because we have enough to eat, a roof on the head, our people are safe, there is no danger of raiding militants or Cholera, not to mention enough time to waste on discussion forums, etc.

 

I have tons to say on the topic, but as I said before, this is an inappropriate discussion on a spiritual forum and so I do not want to.

 

Cheers

I'm not saying its fine to kill or hoard. These are some of the symptoms of one who cannot see the good in the environment. And what will you ever be able to offer the "man from the Congo" who has experienced these sorrows. Will food fulfill his soul, especially after the tragedies he's experienced? It may sustain his body, but perhaps he will be left a hollow of a man regardless. The movie "7 Pounds" portrays this nicely. Only till we see the beauty in our environment will we be at peace. A great example of this in a negative way is the wealthy man at the top of Wall Street with the 67 collector cars and 10 homes worldwide and besides a wife, mistresses, who continues to siphon the blood, sweat and tears of the impoverished to support his blazing unquenchable lusts and greeds. So there are two extremes to the spectrum, let us know the spectrum itself and know that we are different from it.

[sambya1]

 

Yes, I have had these questions, also. The Vaishnava idea is of a God-centered society, and that no one living within 10 km of a temple should go hungry. There is food enough for everyone, often the problem is unequal distribution of food. The poor have fewer resources for survival than do the other classes. That is why there is the Food for Life program in temples in certain sections of the world. So there is a compassionate set-up for alleviation of world hunger through prasadam distribution. But we must still understand that it is the conditioned soul's renegade activities that have caused him to be put into these temporary positions of enjoyment and suffering. Ultimately the soul needs to surrender, rather than insisting on his false independence. Upon full surrender he will become reinstated in the eternal plane, and there will be no more question of suffering. Hope this helps.

 

you are talking about iskcon . but somehow i dont appriciate this 'food for life ' programme as much as i do to other works of different organisations. take bharat sevashram sangha in india for example . the kind of dedication with which they continue their charitable works even after 100 years and limited funds is spellbounding . and most importantly they dont ask or even remotely expect anything in return. but iskcon inspite of having sound financial capabilities are latecomers to this field . that too with a intention of turning school children and poorpeople into krishna bhakta by regular intake of prasadam . while i dont deny their well intentions( depending on god is certainly good) but it does remind me of the christian missionaries providing outstanding charity just to preach gospel while they recover and turn them into baptised christians once they are out of the bed.

 

such a charity is never a pure charity nor a pure preaching but both rolled in one. this is sakaam charity or charity with desire .obviously someone might say that harinaam daan is the highest charity . i agree . but isnt it also said that harinaam and its glories should be only sung to those eligible to recieve it ?

 

can you manufacture devotees ? its something thats spontaneous within.

[Soma Juice]

The fun thing is you ask many of the same questions i did kaisersose, when i was a atheist.

My view has changed not because i somehow interlectually understood the way of the world or the meaning of existince but I have trough experience of god on my own body washed every last doubht away.

I would just hope you give the buddhist or vedic understading of suffering

a chance. Just like buddha the nature of suffering will be revealed to you.

To understand the concepts from the scriptures and masters you must experience them by meditation, not many poeple reach to a understanding by interlect paradoxes the human mind makes like how can suffering be in this world etc. when it is not a paradox when you get a deeper understanding.

 

just my 2 cents or what ever you say in english hehe

[jeffster]

Hello Sambya 1,

I am not an Iskcon apologist; I left Iskcon in 1980 and have been living independently ever since. I only used the Food for Life program as an example. I also don't live in India, so I am not aware about the many other charitable programs that exist there. I am sure that they are valuable, perhaps, as you suggest, more valuable than Iskcon's program, but it is not my place to judge anyone's program. My statement was only made to assure Mr. Kaiserose that transcendentalists have compassion and are not interested in only their own liberation while the rest of the population suffers. But, of course, everyone suffers, due to ignorance, whether they are well fed or not. The best cure for ignorance is knowledge and the best knowledge is that by which we can vanquish samsara. And, yes, we should not preach to the faithless, it is offensive to do so. On the other hand, four kinds of people surrender to Krishna, so perhaps some of these needy people are sincere and can be preached to without offense.

jeffster/AMd

[Haridasdasdas]

 

Hi ,

maybe it is the tough economic times or maybe it is my own fearfulness or maybe my financial status right about now, but I am in a deep ditch, which I wasn't when I wasn't atheist lets say. I was happy atleast, now all I have is depression and anxiety. Fear has taken complete hold of me, everyday as I see myself go into more and more debt, all I can find comfort in is this book bhagavad gita, and prabhupada's words, ironically. The same words that I actually forbid myself from reading, those same ideas of surrender, which were once given up by me, I made my self believe that there is no God, then how can these words give me this type of comfort, I am still convinced that if there is God, he would be more visible. Anyway, atheism truly makes one miserable, maybe there is a better way.

 

You may not remember me, but anyway sorry for any offense I had created earlier as an atheistic moron.

 

It's all very well to be a devotee when things are going bad, but real devotion continues when things are good as well. I think you should start seriously practising Krishna Consciousness, and regularly reading books and scripture for at least a year before you decide whether or not you 'beleive' in God. Until then, I don't think you will be qualified to make a judgement either way.

 

That sounds harsh, but what I mean is that we cannot decide upon something until we know what it is we're deciding upon. I understand how confusing it can be when things are that uncertain.

 

Hari Hari Bol!

[Haridasdasdas]

 

you are talking about iskcon . but somehow i dont appriciate this 'food for life ' programme as much as i do to other works of different organisations. take bharat sevashram sangha in india for example . the kind of dedication with which they continue their charitable works even after 100 years and limited funds is spellbounding . and most importantly they dont ask or even remotely expect anything in return. but iskcon inspite of having sound financial capabilities are latecomers to this field . that too with a intention of turning school children and poorpeople into krishna bhakta by regular intake of prasadam . while i dont deny their well intentions( depending on god is certainly good) but it does remind me of the christian missionaries providing outstanding charity just to preach gospel while they recover and turn them into baptised christians once they are out of the bed.

 

such a charity is never a pure charity nor a pure preaching but both rolled in one. this is sakaam charity or charity with desire .obviously someone might say that harinaam daan is the highest charity . i agree . but isnt it also said that harinaam and its glories should be only sung to those eligible to recieve it ?

 

can you manufacture devotees ? its something thats spontaneous within.

 

So you think it would be better if we didn't offer the food? You understand that devotees on Food for Life don't preach to the people they serve? Iskcon also do not ask or expect anything in return.

 

You seem to be criticising something you know nothing about.

[Haridasdasdas]

 

Again, the starving, homeless guy in Congo who just witnessed his family slaughtered, is going to disagree with you on this. If I go tell him that he is suffering because his "perspective is distorted", he will spit in my face.

 

It is easy for you and me to engage in idle speculate about how everything is just fine, a sport of the Lord, etc., because we have enough to eat, a roof on the head, our people are safe, there is no danger of raiding militants or Cholera, not to mention enough time to waste on discussion forums, etc.

 

I have tons to say on the topic, but as I said before, this is an inappropriate discussion on a spiritual forum and so I do not want to.

 

Cheers

 

The perspective of the man who killed this family is distorted, is it not? If people aren't doing this, then the environment IS friendly.

[Narasingh]

The perspective of the man who killed this family is distorted, is it not? If people aren't doing this, then the environment IS friendly.

He was speaking of trying to tell a man who witnessed his family's slaughter, not one who performed the slaughter, that their perspective is distorted. How does what you say pertain? I'm sure you have something in mind. Can you make it more transparent?

[Haridasdasdas]

 

He was speaking of trying to tell a man who witnessed his family's slaughter, not one who performed the slaughter, that their perspective is distorted. How does what you say pertain? I'm sure you have something in mind. Can you make it more transparent?

 

Suffering is temporary, and is created by the Jivas, not by Krishna. People with a materialistic mindset will be very distressed by it, but if we understand that the soul is eternal, and that every soul has passed through so much suffering already, we can understand the temporary nature of it. That's not to say that we shouldn't alleviate the suffering of others, simply that we shouldn't be too upset about it.

 

The material world is a place of suffering, since it is the abode of those who wish to be separate from god, and lord it over the material energy, including other living beings. So the suffering created by war, slaughterhouses, oppression etc is man-made and temporary. Chances are that everyone reading this has already undergone such horrible atrocities, but with a new birth they have forgotten them, so how can we identify so much with the trials and tribulation of the body?

[sambya1]

 

So you think it would be better if we didn't offer the food? You understand that devotees on Food for Life don't preach to the people they serve? Iskcon also do not ask or expect anything in return.

 

You seem to be criticising something you know nothing about.

 

it was entirely my personal opinion about the matter . oh yes ! i know iskcon quite well .

 

on your question on 'criticism' , its iskcon who specialises doing that for socio religious organisations doing extensive charitable works . the explanation provided is that temporary feeding the poor might eliminate their hunger but would do nothing to make them realise the true cause of their suffering ( lack of krsna realization , that is) . thats all very good and fine . turning towards god is the highest goal of man , we know that . but what they seem to forget is that religion is a luxury for starving millions . its easy for people like us to sit back at the comforts of our home and speculate about dying children and hungry masses . perhaps its even easy to donate a months earning to such people . but fact remains that people like us with all modern comforts can never understand even a fraction of the pain they actually endures.

 

so when any financially strong religious organisation nominally approaches such helpless people with a subconcious motive of conversion and go on publicising such campaigns proudly world over it automatically draws comparison of similar other organisations who toil day and night with little or no funds without any self proclamation whatsoever.

 

once more it was my personal opinion.

[raghu]

 

on your question on 'criticism' , its iskcon who specialises doing that for socio religious organisations doing extensive charitable works .

 

And similarly, Vivekananda and his fanatical, brain-dead followers blame all the religious problems in the world on Dvaita (he says so in his collected works), criticizes icon worship as necessary for superstitious & undeveloped minds (thus managing to insult the faith of millions of Hindus), and decries the study of Bhagavad-Gita as irrelevant and instead recommends playing football as a better means of attaining self-realization.

 

But, don't take my word for it. It's all in his writings and speeches.

 

 

the explanation provided is that temporary feeding the poor might eliminate their hunger but would do nothing to make them realise the true cause of their suffering ( lack of krsna realization , that is) .

 

Factually that is correct. Feeding the poor might eliminate their hunger but does not address the root cause of their hunger. I don't see anything controversial about that statement.

 

 

thats all very good and fine . turning towards god is the highest goal of man , we know that . but what they seem to forget is that religion is a luxury for starving millions . its easy for people like us to sit back at the comforts of our home and speculate about dying children and hungry masses . perhaps its even easy to donate a months earning to such people . but fact remains that people like us with all modern comforts can never understand even a fraction of the pain they actually endures.

 

 

This is an atheistic point of view, and as it happens to be the view of Swami Vivekananda and his followers, this just supports my contention that he is nothing more than an atheist dressed in saffron robes. Either God, dharma, and self-realization are real, or they are not. One either accepts that they are real or one does not. If they are real, they are real for everyone, not just for those who happen to have luxuries. The Pandavas were exiled from their kingdom and forced to live under the most austere conditions during exile; religion did not cease to be relevant to them. Suffering and enjoyment are part of a cyclical process that is based on one's karma. An intelligent person wants to end the repeated process of birth and death, knowing that suffering keeps coming back regardless of how much wealth and influence he has.

 

Something the Vivekananda people repeatedly fail to grasp is that you can give charity and spiritual knowledge; these things are not mutually exclusive. Many people who are poor naturally ask why they suffer - that is the beginning of spiritual inquiry, and merely feeding them does not answer that question. Many of those who are poor are also hungry spiritually, something you would know if you actually spent any time *talking* to them. Or you could just continue to use them as examples of your first-class generosity to stroke your already bloated ego as a great benefactor.

 

 

so when any financially strong religious organisation nominally approaches such helpless people with a subconcious motive of conversion and go on publicising such campaigns proudly world over it automatically draws comparison of similar other organisations who toil day and night with little or no funds without any self proclamation whatsoever.

 

 

1) The Ramakrishna/Vivekananda Mission is a financially strong "religious" organization.

 

2) They do approach helpless people with an overt motive of converting them to their point of view.

 

3) That point of view being that all religions are valid in some sense and that real Hindu dharma is some watered down, politically correct form of Advaita.

 

4) Followers of the Ramakrishna and Vivekananda societies do publicize their campaigns proudly the world over and specifically make it a point to contrast their welfare work with the work of other religious organizations in an effort to prop up their religious credibility.

 

5) I'm not clear on what one's welfare activities have to do with the strength or validity of his religious point of view. Perhaps it is because the RK/Vivekananda people have very little substance to their "religion" that they must constantly emphasize how superior their welfare work is. But that is just my impression and I am always ready to be corrected.

[srikanthdk71]

 

Suffering is temporary, and is created by the Jivas, not by Krishna. People with a materialistic mindset will be very distressed by it, but if we understand that the soul is eternal, and that every soul has passed through so much suffering already, we can understand the temporary nature of it. That's not to say that we shouldn't alleviate the suffering of others, simply that we shouldn't be too upset about it.

 

Dear One, its hard to believe that suffering is caused by jivas temporarily with a materialistic mindset. Why did Rama suffer without Sita? Why did Krishna suffer with Jambavan? It neither has any relation to do with the past Karmas. If that is the case, Rama and Krishna will have to be accepted as ordinary people like you and me who carried their Karmas from their previous birth and hence suffered.

 

 

The material world is a place of suffering, since it is the abode of those who wish to be separate from god, and lord it over the material energy, including other living beings. So the suffering created by war, slaughterhouses, oppression etc is man-made and temporary. Chances are that everyone reading this has already undergone such horrible atrocities, but with a new birth they have forgotten them, so how can we identify so much with the trials and tribulation of the body?

 

This looks like a biblical quote. Anything and everything material or non-material is just beautiful. All instruments are provided for man to enjoy by nature. When craving for more is adopted by man, it is termed as suffering. It happens again by nature. Bondages of father/mother/sister/brother/wife/children/land/money/belongings etc and the determination by man to protect it by naming it as Dharma has caused suffering. Leave all and there will be no suffering.

[Narasingh]

 

Dear One, its hard to believe that suffering is caused by jivas temporarily with a materialistic mindset. Why did Rama suffer without Sita? Why did Krishna suffer with Jambavan? It neither has any relation to do with the past Karmas. If that is the case, Rama and Krishna will have to be accepted as ordinary people like you and me who carried their Karmas from their previous birth and hence suffered.

 

 

 

This looks like a biblical quote. Anything and everything material or non-material is just beautiful. All instruments are provided for man to enjoy by nature. When craving for more is adopted by man, it is termed as suffering. It happens again by nature. Bondages of father/mother/sister/brother/wife/children/land/money/belongings etc and the determination by man to protect it by naming it as Dharma has caused suffering. Leave all and there will be no suffering.

Leave all and there will be no suffering.

[Smiley]

Redsox, don't worry. If a higher power exists and wants to reveal itself to you, it is the business of that higher power; everyones destiny is not the same. The remedy for fear is to from this point on follow your conscience scrupulously. Not someone elses conscience, but your conscience. If you find comfort in the words of the Bhagavad Gita, then by all means, continue to read it. However, don't force anything. Everyones destiny is not the same. Also, please consider adopting a non-violent diet: http://www.meat.org/

 

P.S. For me it was 9/11/2001 that got me interested in Bhagavad Gita.

 

 

 

Hi ,

maybe it is the tough economic times or maybe it is my own fearfulness or maybe my financial status right about now, but I am in a deep ditch, which I wasn't when I wasn't atheist lets say. I was happy atleast, now all I have is depression and anxiety. Fear has taken complete hold of me, everyday as I see myself go into more and more debt, all I can find comfort in is this book bhagavad gita, and prabhupada's words, ironically. The same words that I actually forbid myself from reading, those same ideas of surrender, which were once given up by me, I made my self believe that there is no God, then how can these words give me this type of comfort, I am still convinced that if there is God, he would be more visible. Anyway, atheism truly makes one miserable, maybe there is a better way.

 

You may not remember me, but anyway sorry for any offense I had created earlier as an atheistic moron.

[raghu]

 

Dear One, its hard to believe that suffering is caused by jivas temporarily with a materialistic mindset. Why did Rama suffer without Sita? Why did Krishna suffer with Jambavan? It neither has any relation to do with the past Karmas. If that is the case, Rama and Krishna will have to be accepted as ordinary people like you and me who carried their Karmas from their previous birth and hence suffered.

 

Accepting for the moment that Rama and Krishna "suffered," the answer to your question is obvious. Ravana, a jiva, abducted Sita and thus was the proximate cause of Rama's "suffering," and Krishna got manipulated into a fight with Jambavan and thus "suffered" because of several jivas trying to posess the Syamantaka jewel. So the statement is correct - the "suffering" was caused by jivas. In fact, you just said it yourself right here:

 

 

All instruments are provided for man to enjoy by nature. When craving for more is adopted by man, it is termed as suffering.

 

 

It happens again by nature. Bondages of father/mother/sister/brother/wife/children/land/money/belongings etc and the determination by man to protect it by naming it as Dharma has caused suffering. Leave all and there will be no suffering.

 

So abandoning dharma will resolve suffering? So if kings abandon their dharma and stop protecting their subjects, this will lead to less suffering? Are you really sure you want to go on record as having made such a dopey assertion?

[kaisersose]

 

Bondages of father/mother/sister/brother/wife/children/land/money/belongings etc and the determination by man to protect it by naming it as Dharma has caused suffering. Leave all and there will be no suffering.

 

One can give up all the above and still suffer. Chronic Migraines, dental problems, back-ache, bad knees, no food to eat...the list is endless.

 

And one can have a family, friends and still be of good health and actually be happy - unbelievable as it sounds to some people who (through their association with religion) have managed to deeply condition themselves over the years to believe that life on earth equates to suffering.

 

Suffering by definition is something that is beyond our control. For if we could do something about it, we would end it immediately and there would be no sufferng then.

 

Through history we know that man is naturally gregarious - tends to live in societies and thrives in a family environment. Then some religions come along and tell you to do the exact reverse by going against nature - do not eat for taste, do not have sex, do not accumulate material possessions, do not get attached to people...everything that man's natural instincts drive him to do, these religions tell him not to do. A little bit of irony here - give up everything you like to do and you will be happy!

 

In my opinion, such religious systems can only result in a repressed, depressed, confused, brain-numbed individual - for all we know, people who may have possibly been happier if they had never come in contact with such religions.

 

Cheers