Shiv Maha Puran doubts

[Kali_Upasaka]

The eclectic sect of Smartas who worship Krishna is forgotten. The Smarta religion is based on a non-sectarian approach. Swami Vivekananda's statement should be viewed in the historical context of Vaishnavas Vs Smartas in Bengal.

 

The Smartas are the overwhelming majority of the Hindus in India. The hatred for Hinduism has to be understood in this context.

 

Again what has been assumed by many members is that all Smartas are Advaitins. Far from true. I can even give the name of a pure Vaishnavite Swamiji who is at present the head of a Smarta math in Bengal affiliated to Sankara math.

 

But it is not only Smartas but also the Sri Vaishnavas and Madhvas who believe in Sriman Narayana and Vishnu, who have come under attack.

 

This shows that some members are not even aware of their Guru Parampara. For a follower of Chaitanya Maha Prabhu to attack Madhavacharya is pure Guru Nindhana, the ultimate sin.

[sant]

 

Several points:

 

1) The definition of "sectarianism" seems to mean different things to different people. There is nothing wrong with believing in the correctness of one's views and the incorrectness of contradictory views, so long as one can discuss them in an informed and cultured manner.

 

2) If by "sectarianism" you are referring to loud, brash, and rude bickering characteristic of Audarya, then I beg to differ with your assumption that it is a problem with "Vaishnavas." On the contrary, it is primarily a problem with one specific group of "Vaishnavas." You and I both know who they are, but i do not want to name them for fear that this posting will be deleted.

 

3) Shaivism and Shaktaism is no more all-accepting in their assumptions than Vaishnavism is. For that matter, even Neo-Vedantins are not so all-accepting. In his Complete Works, Swami Vivekananda blames all of the religious conflicts in the world on Dvaita. Similar attitudes are found in many Neo-Hindu leaders who essentially argue that the God-jiva dichotomy is inherently intolerant, racist, bigoted, etc. This attitude is itself prejudice, so no holier-than-thou conclusions can be extrapolated about non-Vaishnavas.

 

Ha ha ha ulta chor kotwal ko daante

[theist]

 

The mistake was that I thought Vaishnavas and Hindus could co-exist and discuss religion and philosophy in close proximity. This has obviously proven to be a false assumption.

 

 

Generally even distinct Vaisnava groups will argue over whose sampradaya's conclusions are correct. Even those GV's in the same sampradaya argue over whose guru is legitimate or not.

 

One reason is those who have taken siksa and inspiration through Bhaktisiddhanta's line have a more evangelical spirit. Where world wide preaching is the goal you will find more out-spoken people.

 

To me there is nothing more painful then to hear people 'go along to get along'. This to me is the calm of stagnent pond.

 

So it appears it's up to you JNdas, my friend, to make the decision to run a generalized Hindu forum without Vaisnava participation or not, because you are correct they do not go together well.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Generally even distinct Vaisnava groups will argue over whose sampradaya's conclusions are correct.

It has been seen in the past that many "gaudiya vaishnava only" forums have opened on the internet, and the fighting there was even worse than here. As far as I know, all of them later closed down because they were just a mess of insults.

 

The equation seems to point to ISKCON or Gaudiya Vaishnava followers being unable to converse with others without trying to convert/smash/defeat/kick in the face of the other side, or even doing all of those simultaneously.

 

Honestly, if iskcon devotees are completely unable to control their anger and dislike of other's beliefs (and the same goes for the Hindus) I would prefer they don't come. They just end up giving a bad name to ISKCON and Prabhupada. I can't imagine anyone trying what goes on here in real life, say on a bus with someone sitting next to them.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam JND and all

 

 

It is unfortunate that someone asks a sincere question about shiva purana, and some members want to immediately come out with their sectarian attacks. It is for this reason that I feel a religious forum is pointless.

 

Is it justified to attack someone because they like Lord Shiva? Suppose we replace Shiva with some other religion. Would the same attack be appropriate?

 

For example, would it be appropriate to mock other religious people as follows:

 

Oh great, we have two Christ Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Buddha Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Islam Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Yahwey Afficinados on board here!

 

It is sad to see some people's hatred for Hinduism while they themselves follow a subset of it. Sectarian hatred is what makes religion useless. Whether it is Christian sectarianism, Islamic sectarianism, or Hindu sectarianism (under the brand Vaishnava).

 

If a thread doesn't interest you or tally with your belief system, then please don't read it. If there is someone asking about Shiva, Shakti or Ganesh, and if you hate those devas, then please don't read the thread. Try to control your speech. Only speak on those topics which you hold dear.

 

As has been mentioned many times, this is not a vaishnava forum. Have the courtesy to respect all vedic religions here even if you disagree with them. It is a fact that basically all Vaishnavas here have never even read Shiva Purana, so they should just keep quiet. If you don't know a topic, please resist the uncontrollable urge to speak.

 

I used to participate regularly in these forums, but because of so many meaningless posts I lost interest in even reading the forums. Now I don't even have much interest to keep the forums open, as 50% of what is posted here is basically rubbish, with the other 50% being actually valuable information. If we count the number of innocent posters like the starter of this thread who have visited and posted sincere questions on Hinduism, only to be smashed with the vaishnava know it all hammer, it will be thousands and thousands of people. Is it worth it, offending thousands of sincere seekers, just to have a place for religious people to argue?

 

 

 

 

Reading the above message, my eyes became wet, all this years I had been posting here, this is all I wanted to convey. If I had said anything other than that or hurt any ones sentiment, I apologise unreservedly.

I will now bow out of this forum and resist posting any further, happy in the knowledge the forum founder has made this profound statement and if I can take a cue from him than I should concentrate in my sadhana.

 

 

Once again my Dandvat Pranam.

 

Jai Shree Krishna

[sant]

 

is unfortunate that someone asks a sincere question about shiva purana, and some members want to immediately come out with their sectarian attacks. It is for this reason that I feel a religious forum is pointless.

 

Is it justified to attack someone because they like Lord Shiva? Suppose we replace Shiva with some other religion. Would the same attack be appropriate?

 

For example, would it be appropriate to mock other religious people as follows:

 

Oh great, we have two Christ Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Buddha Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Islam Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Yahwey Afficinados on board here!

 

It is sad to see some people's hatred for Hinduism while they themselves follow a subset of it. Sectarian hatred is what makes religion useless. Whether it is Christian sectarianism, Islamic sectarianism, or Hindu sectarianism (under the brand Vaishnava).

 

If a thread doesn't interest you or tally with your belief system, then please don't read it. If there is someone asking about Shiva, Shakti or Ganesh, and if you hate those devas, then please don't read the thread. Try to control your speech. Only speak on those topics which you hold dear.

 

As has been mentioned many times, this is not a vaishnava forum. Have the courtesy to respect all vedic religions here even if you disagree with them. It is a fact that basically all Vaishnavas here have never even read Shiva Purana, so they should just keep quiet. If you don't know a topic, please resist the uncontrollable urge to speak.

 

I used to participate regularly in these forums, but because of so many meaningless posts I lost interest in even reading the forums. Now I don't even have much interest to keep the forums open, as 50% of what is posted here is basically rubbish, with the other 50% being actually valuable information. If we count the number of innocent posters like the starter of this thread who have visited and posted sincere questions on Hinduism, only to be smashed with the vaishnava know it all hammer, it will be thousands and thousands of people. Is it worth it, offending thousands of sincere seekers, just to have a place for religious people to argue?

 

The mistake was that I thought Vaishnavas and Hindus could co-exist and discuss religion and philosophy in close proximity. This has obviously proven to be a false assumption.

 

 

Certainly not no hare krishan has attacked this thread.Tell me one place where he has.

It is actually the others.

[sant]

 

Quote:

The mistake was that I thought Vaishnavas and Hindus could co-exist and discuss religion and philosophy in close proximity. This has obviously proven to be a false assumption.

 

 

 

Certainly this is not a hindu site either. The website always says it.No barriers for religion.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Certainly not no hare krishan has attacked this thread.Tell me one place where he has. It is actually the others.

 

 

Let us reverse the rolls and see if it would be appropriate for shaivites to do the same in a Vaishnava thread:

 

1) A person asks a question on the Srimad Bhagavatam as to which version is best.

 

2) A shaivite replies "all versions are wrong. that book is in the mode of ignorance so its useless.

 

3) Next shaivite posts "there has never been a more gory book, its full of stories of Vishnu beheading people."

 

4) Another shaivite then posts 20 pages of copy pasted commentary from the Shiva Gita to convert the original poster to Shaivism.

 

5) Next a Shaivite posts "Vishnu is a useless person because he has never explained yoga, karma, jiva, which foods to eat, dharma or moksha."

 

6) The same shaivite comes and says "Oh great, looks like we have some Vishnu afficinados on board here" and then challenges all others to show him where the useless Vishnu spoke any of these spiritual topics.

 

7) Finally another shaivite comes and says "Certainly no shaivite has attacked this thread."

[sant]

 

Quote:

Certainly not no hare krishan has attacked this thread.Tell me one place where he has. It is actually the others.

 

 

Let us reverse the rolls and see if it would be appropriate for shaivites to do the same in a Vaishnava thread:

 

1) A person asks a question on the Srimad Bhagavatam as to which version is best.

 

2) A shaivite replies "all versions are wrong. that book is in the mode of ignorance so its useless.

 

3) Next shaivite posts "there has never been a more gory book, its full of stories of Vishnu beheading people."

 

4) Another shaivite then posts 20 pages of copy pasted commentary from the Shiva Gita to convert the original poster to Shaivism.

 

5) Next a Shaivite posts "Vishnu is a useless person because he has never explained yoga, karma, jiva, which foods to eat, dharma or moksha."

 

6) The same shaivite comes and says "Oh great, looks like we have some Vishnu afficinados on board here" and then challenges all others to show him where the useless Vishnu spoke any of these spiritual topics.

 

7) Finally another shaivite comes and says "Certainly no shaivite has attacked this thread."

 

 

 

Ok there was a change of topic but qouting from bhagwat is no attack.Shiv purana is tamsic and it is recognised as vayu purana as kaiserose says.

If you ever read the shiv purana youl realise why ranjeetmore said it though i do think that was not that should have been answer to the poster question.

ANd dear bhaktjan's answers are relating to jaswants question.

 

And by the way i said hare krishna meaning an isckonite which ranjeetmore isnt nor i am i.

I do get your point but such things do happen but rarely.

[hindustani]

Sant=Sanatbhai

First try to understand what JNDji is saying to all of us.Try and try harder to digest it and if you fail to understand real meaning of his post take someone's help,please do that.

[sant]

 

5) Next a Shaivite posts "Vishnu is a useless person because he has never explained yoga, karma, jiva, which foods to eat, dharma or moksha."

 

Certainly not no one has said such a thing here.It has been clearly mentioned in bhaktjans posts that one shouldnt insult lord shiva.

Go and read it.Hindustani sir you also.

How you know my name?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

If you ever read the shiv purana youl realise why ranjeetmore said it though i do think that was not that should have been answer to the poster question.

 

A purana being in the mode of tamas or rajas does not disqualify the value of that ancient scripture in anyway. It deals with the aim of the text, the audience, and the predominating deity of the text (based on trimurti). A purana cannot be discounted simply because it is not classified as sattva.

 

Books like Brahma Vaivarta Purana are quoted extensively by gaudiya acharyas (as it speaks about Radha, whereas sattvic Puranas do not). The Purana may be categorized as rajas, but that does not disqualify it in any way.

 

As far as the statement someone made "show me where shiva speaks about moksha, karma, jiva..." Shiva happens to be the speaker of about 50% of all the Vedic literature (including parts of the Bhagavatam). While not knowing a topic, some people want to pose as authorities and impose their own limited viewpoint on other people.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

i was wondering why this sectarianism primarily shows up in vaishnvas ?

I don't think it does. I don't see Sri Vaishnavas making such arguments. I don't see Madhva Vaishnavas posting such arguments. Basically it looks like it has to do with people being brought up in another culture converting to Vaishnavism. I'm not saying there is anything wrong because of that, but just that seems to be the source behind it. Those Indian vaishnavas brought up surrounded by "hinduism" don't have the habit to attack it. Where as those who convert from one religion to another religion have a tendency to "defend" their chosen religion, or even to try and convert others to their religion.

 

There is nothing wrong with defending your beliefs or even in trying to convince others. But there is a line of decency where we should not ridicule people who don't accept our beliefs, or try to mock people who have different beliefs.

[sant]

 

A purana being in the mode of tamas or rajas does not disqualify the value of that ancient scripture in anyway. It deals with the aim of the text, the audience, and the predominating deity of the text (based on trimurti). A purana cannot be discounted simply because it is not classified as sattva.

 

 

Of course it doesnt but it being in tamas guna is not to be considered clear.

 

 

 

As far as the statement someone made "show me where shiva speaks about moksha, karma, jiva..." Shiva happens to be the speaker of about 50% of all the Vedic literature (including parts of the Bhagavatam). While not knowing a topic, some people want to pose as authorities and impose their own limited viewpoint on other people.

Ok i agree with that.I cant say about the figure of 50% but.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Certainly not no one has said such a thing here.It has been clearly mentioned in bhaktjans posts that one shouldnt insult lord shiva.

Either the statement was said to mock Shiva or it was said out of complete ignorance. How else could someone say Shiva never spoke anything on such basic topics as Dharma, Moksha, Karma, etc.? When your own books (the Bhagavatam) are filled with instructions by Shiva on spiritual life, how can you accuse Shiva of never having said anything usefull on spiritual topics, especially in a thread where a Shiva devotee is asking about Lord Shiva? Isn't that insulting?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

As to the original question, the shiva linga and the pillar of fire are identical. The shiva linga was composed of spiritual fire. This pillar of light still exists as a spiritual mountain in Tiruvannamalai named Arunachala. The siddhas and sages are able to see the effulgent light reaching up into the space, and for this reason they try to live around this mountain and perform their sadhana there.

 

Shambhu is an effulgent light. From the Vaishnava viewpoint he is a light emanating from the eyes of Maha Vishnu as He glances over the material creation. That effulgent glance (shambhu) unites with prakriti (Devi) leading to the manifested material creation. Pradhana (undifferentiated material energy) transforms to mahat-tattva (the manifested principles of material existence) by the influence of time (Shambhu or Shiva). This is further explained in 13th chapter of Bhagavad Gita.

[sant]

 

Either the statement was said to mock Shiva or it was said out of complete ignorance. How else could someone say Shiva never spoke anything on such basic topics as Dharma, Moksha, Karma, etc.? When your own books (the Bhagavatam) are filled with instructions by Shiva on spiritual life, how can you accuse Shiva of never having said anything usefull on spiritual topics, especially in a thread where a Shiva devotee is asking about Lord Shiva? Isn't that insulting?

 

No bhaktjan must have said it in a hurry talking to kaiserose.

 

Youve skipped this

 

PURPORT

 

Lord Śiva is the topmost Vaiṣṇava (vaiṣṇavānāḿ yathā śambhuḥ). It is therefore said, vaiṣṇavera kriyā-mudrā vijñe nā bujhaya. Even the most intelligent person cannot understand what a Vaiṣṇava like Lord Śiva is doing or how he is acting. Those who are conquered by lusty desires and anger cannot estimate the glories of Lord Śiva, whose position is always transcendental. In all the activities associated with lusty desires, Lord Śiva is an implement of ātma-rāma. Ordinary persons, therefore, should not try to understand Lord Śiva and his activities. One who tries to criticize the activities of Lord Śiva is shameless.

 

 

[sant]

Radharani is also mentioned in Padm purana.

(sorry to edit its actually padm purana nvertheless sattvic.)

[hindustani]

Sanat

 

Youve skipped this

Now I think you need to spare your time to know who really JND is,go and click 2 sites mentioned in his posts also you will find many videos in youtube on him,if he has skipped that part rest assure he has inuf knowledge to find what has been written in shashtra,he is an owner of this forum and a real vaishnava who respect others so keep these things in minds while addressing to him.

Yes sometime keeping a mum solves many things in our life,each time jumping with no real efforts mostly creates a bad impression.This is what I prefer to do when elders are talking(here example is JND).

[sant]

 

Shiv Maha Puran doubts

Hello Everyone,

I'm new to this forum and this is my first post. I'm really glad to see there are still so many ppl out there who are interested in rich heritage, vedic knowledge and spiritualism.

I have a question. I have started reading Shiv Maha Puran and the war between Brahma and Vishnu is quite inconsistent with different sources, so is the pillar of fire or Shiv Linga itself.

1) In one source it says Brahma born from a lotus that evolved from Vishnu and trying to know his origin Brahma started to fight with Vishnu.

2) And another source cites as once Brahma was walking and Vishnu ignored him which caused anger in Brahma and fight started eventually.

 

Also when they are fighting in one source it's given that Shiv Linga appeared and they decided to find its limits while another source says a pillar of fire (Lord Shiva himself) appeared when they were fighting for which they both tried to find the limits.

Now, I'm really confused which one is the authentic version. I'm not so good at sanskrit .. can't verify myself.. . Please senior members and any pandits around help me out.

 

Thanks,

Mothman

 

This is one source.

Brahma thought he might find the answers to these questions if he explored the lotus a bit. Perhaps he ought to try and find the centre of the lotus. Brahma descended down the stem of the lotus and wandered around for a hundred years. But he could not find the flower’s centre. He then decided that he might as well go back to the cell from where he had been born. But despite wandering around the stem for another hundred years, Brahma could not find the cell. By then he was so tired that he gave up and rested.

Suddenly he heard the words, Brahma, perform tapasya (meditation).

Brahma meditated for twelve years. When the twelve years were over, the four-armed Vishnu appeared before Brahma. In the four hands Vishnu held a shankha (conch shell), a chakra (a bladed discus), a gada (mace) and a padma. Brahma didn’t know who this person was and he asked, Who are you?

Vishnu didn’t directly answer the question. Instead, he replied, Son, the great Lord Vishnu has created you.

Who are you to call me a son? demanded Brahma.

Can’t you recognize me? came the reply. I am Vishnu. It is from my body that you have been created.

But Brahma was not convinced. He began to fight with Vishnu.

The Linga

While they were thus engaged in fighting, a shining linga (Shiva’s image) arrived on the scene. It seemed to have no beginning or end.

Vishnu said, Brahma, let us stop fighting. There is a third being here now. What on earth is this linga? And where did it come from? Let us try and find out what this is. You adopt the form of a swan (hamsa) and go up. I shall adopt the form of boar (varaha) and go down. Let us try and find the extremities of this linga.

Brahma agreed. He became a whilte swan and flew up. Vishnu became a white boar and went down. They looked for four thousand years, but could not find the end of the linga. So they returned to where they had started off from and began to pray. They prayed for a hundred years. After the hundred years were over, the sound of om was heard and a being with five faces and ten arms appeared before them. This was Mahadeva or Shiva.

Vishnu said, It is good that Brahma and I have been fighting. It is because of our fight that you arrived.

Shiva replied, We are all three parts of the same entity and have been divided into three. Brahma is the creator. Vishnu is the preserver and I am the destroyer. There is another being named Rudra who will be born form my body, but Rudra and I are really one and the same. Let Brahma create now.

Shiva disappeared and Brahma and Vishnu gave up their forms of a swan and a boar.

[sant]

Jai shri rama

[smeyyappan]

 

It is unfortunate that someone asks a sincere question about shiva purana, and some members want to immediately come out with their sectarian attacks. It is for this reason that I feel a religious forum is pointless.

 

Is it justified to attack someone because they like Lord Shiva? Suppose we replace Shiva with some other religion. Would the same attack be appropriate?

 

For example, would it be appropriate to mock other religious people as follows:

 

Oh great, we have two Christ Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Buddha Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Islam Afficinados on board here!

 

Oh great, we have two Yahwey Afficinados on board here!

 

It is sad to see some people's hatred for Hinduism while they themselves follow a subset of it. Sectarian hatred is what makes religion useless. Whether it is Christian sectarianism, Islamic sectarianism, or Hindu sectarianism (under the brand Vaishnava).

 

If a thread doesn't interest you or tally with your belief system, then please don't read it. If there is someone asking about Shiva, Shakti or Ganesh, and if you hate those devas, then please don't read the thread. Try to control your speech. Only speak on those topics which you hold dear.

 

As has been mentioned many times, this is not a vaishnava forum. Have the courtesy to respect all vedic religions here even if you disagree with them. It is a fact that basically all Vaishnavas here have never even read Shiva Purana, so they should just keep quiet. If you don't know a topic, please resist the uncontrollable urge to speak.

 

I used to participate regularly in these forums, but because of so many meaningless posts I lost interest in even reading the forums. Now I don't even have much interest to keep the forums open, as 50% of what is posted here is basically rubbish, with the other 50% being actually valuable information. If we count the number of innocent posters like the starter of this thread who have visited and posted sincere questions on Hinduism, only to be smashed with the vaishnava know it all hammer, it will be thousands and thousands of people. Is it worth it, offending thousands of sincere seekers, just to have a place for religious people to argue?

 

The mistake was that I thought Vaishnavas and Hindus could co-exist and discuss religion and philosophy in close proximity. This has obviously proven to be a false assumption.

Dear Sir (Sri Jahnava Nitai Das),

 

It is nice to see your writing after a long time. May Lord Narayana, The Ocean of Mercy bless you and your associates with long life and eternal wisdom to continue the good activities you are doing in serving His devotees and non devotees alike.

 

With Best Regards

Meyyappan S

[kaisersose]

 

Generally even distinct Vaisnava groups will argue over whose sampradaya's conclusions are correct. Even those GV's in the same sampradaya argue over whose guru is legitimate or not.

 

Has nothing to do with the problem of some Vaishnavas constantly jumping into Shaiva threads and telling them they are Tamasic, demi-God worshippers, etc.

 

 

One reason is those who have taken siksa and inspiration through Bhaktisiddhanta's line have a more evangelical spirit. Where world wide preaching is the goal you will find more out-spoken people.

 

This out-spoken evangelism is nothing more than an annoyance here. In your decade or so presence on these forums, how many people have you inspired/converted over to your way of thinking? Zero. On the other hand, at least a handful of people lost interest in your system, after exposure to your constant disagreements and zealotry. And yet, you guys fail to see the damage you are doing.

 

 

So it appears it's up to you JNdas, my friend, to make the decision to run a generalized Hindu forum without Vaisnava participation or not, because you are correct they do not go together well.

 

That is a stretch. Ony a few western converted Hare Krishnas have a problem with Hinduism. The rest are mostly fine with it. It is not about agreeing with Hinduism or Shaivism, but letting the other guy sing his song and not bombard him with your sectarian spiel. That is what a general spiritual discussion forum is all about.

 

Cheers

[bhaktajan]

 

Sant=Sanatbhai

First try to understand what JNDji is saying to all of us.Try and try harder to digest it and if you fail to understand real meaning of his post take someone's help,please do that.

 

kaisersose, Ganeshprasad, sambya --Stand up and be heard! Be understood! Be a proper representative! Scholarship is predicated on more scholarship.

 

kaisersose provided to data nor answer to by questions!

 

But somehow(?) three more pages of posts appear. "Afficinado" translates from the latin as, "Fan".

 

Where are the answers I asked for?

 

My questions was: "Where are the statistics?" or

"What can you show me you learnt and thus from where?"

 

kaisersose responds with check out such and such book --but he is bereft of recalling the most inportant axioms.

 

Either you are a true Afficinado and thus a reliable reference or you're just an iconoclast upstart who's propagating controvercy because you are addicted to chaos.

 

ENLIGHTEN ME AND POSTERS AND READERS OF THE WORLD!!!

Answer the queries:

 

[Oh, I guess you expect me to approach you in submission first?]

 

Where, in sastra, has Lord Shiva explained the topics:

jiva,

parkriti,

karma,

isvara,

kala (time),

the differences between the yogic schools of thought,

basic sitting silent meditation,

dharma,

moksha,

sat-sanga,

good vs passionate vs bad foods/actions/austerities/fearlessness/equanimity/faith/

sacrifice/charity/renunciation/knowledge/performers/(doers of actions)/understanding/determination/happiness?

 

Please remember not to quote anyone except your Dear Bhagavan's melodious words.

 

....is is a challenge to scharlorly thinkers & researchers --not otherwise . . . >

[sambya]

 

I don't see Sri Vaishnavas making such arguments. I don't see Madhva Vaishnavas posting such arguments. Basically it looks like it has to do with people being brought up in another culture converting to Vaishnavism. Those Indian vaishnavas brought up surrounded by "hinduism" don't have the habit to attack it.

 

this is so true !!

 

even i have noticed that ! i was reading through your posts and wondering if only all iskcon disciples were like you !!

 

you have got the correct understanding and perspective and have learned to pick up the best from all . i dont know how to praise you.............and falling short of words !!

 

why dont you post more often ? we would love to discuss matters with you .

you know , there is hardly a isckonite left here with whom you can have a respectful discussion . and with their persistent abuses and mud slinging , others also develop a reciprocal hatred and indulge in making direct insults to them ( including myself , i must admit) . but all this is just resulting out of such pests within the iskcon world . without them iskcon might as well be one of the best existing spritual orders of the world !!