Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 Haribol, What is the order of accuracy for following statements: a) Jesus = Supreme b) Swaminarayan = Supreme c) Shiva = Supreme My view: 1. Most accurate (but obviously still false) = Swaminarayan as supreme (assuming the Skanda Purana prediction that he is an incarnation of the Supreme Lord to be true) - similar to the Vishnu/Rama/Krishna/Narsimha etc argument... 2. Next accurate - Shiva supreme - since this is at least backed up by Shiva Purana 3. Least accurate - Jesus supreme - since jesus is son of God (not even an avatar) Views? Haribol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 The reason i put the above is beacuse the common assumption is the inverse order...Jesus being more closer to the correct conception of the Supreme Lord... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 a & c... true.. but not the "most supreme" b false Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 There's sastrik evidence in support of b & c being god, none for a. b & c equally accurate, a false, mayavada. Jiva tattva isn't Visnu tattva. Acaryas like Sridhara Svami, Vallabha, Swaminarayan, Rupa Gosvami, Baladeva Vidyabhusana, Prabhupada and Narayan Maharaja all recognize Shiva as Visnu tattva. In Vaishnava siddhanta Shiva is recognized as god but not worshiped as such. He's considered devotee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 There's sastrik evidence in support of b & c being god, none for a. ....'till now i have not seen any valid shastric support for b and i do not know any acharya gaudya vaishnava who says that swaminarayana is god or even a spiritual authority b & c equally accurate, a false, mayavada. Jiva tattva isn't Visnu tattva. .... if it is not done with envy and offence toward others, who sees his spiritual master as good as god makes spiritual advancement Prabhupada and Narayan Maharaja all recognize Shiva as Visnu tattva. ...prabhupada says that he's shiva tattva.. a tattva on his own.. not vishnu tattva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 "if it is not done with envy and offence toward others, who sees his spiritual master as good as god makes spiritual advancement" if you dont recognize sastra (or havent seen it), why not at least apply this to b "i have not seen any valid shastric support for b" "prabhupada says that he's shiva tattva.. a tattva on his own.. not vishnu tattva" Well you have much to learn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2004 Report Share Posted May 15, 2004 Isn't skanda purana valid evidence? Adhyaya 18 of the Vasudev Mahatmya of Skand Purana details many of the manifestations of God Supreme which seem to be presented in chronological order - including Rama, Krishna, Veda Vyaas etc. God himself is addressing Lord Kartikeya (Skand) and Narad Muni in this Adhyaya to details his future manifestations. Verse 41 details Budhha Avatar then the following: Maya krushnana Nihataha Sarjunana Raneshu Yay | Pravartayishyantyasurastay Tvadharmam Yada Kshitauha ||42|| Dharmadevatada Murtaum Naranarayatmana | Pravrutayapi Kalau Brahman ! Bhutvaham Samago Dvijaha ||43|| Muni-shapan-nrutam Praptam Sarshim Janakmatmanaha | Tatoavita Gurubhyoaham Sadharmam Sthapayanaja ||44|| This clearly explains that in Kali yuga, the Lord will be born to a family of Samvedi brahmins, to Dharma dev and Murti devi using Narnarayan as the causal factor. By establishing Dharma, he will free the Munis and his parents from the curse of the Rishi, which sent them all on earth to be reborn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2004 Report Share Posted May 16, 2004 "if it is not done with envy and offence toward others, who sees his spiritual master as good as god makes spiritual advancement" if you dont recognize sastra (or havent seen it), why not at least apply this to b ----to recognize the shastras means to follow them even if we do not know that we are doing it (it can be the case of following a true master like jesus).. and reading the shastras but not following them taking shelter in a bogus teacher means nothing Well you have much to learn ----surely not from your bad manners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2004 Report Share Posted May 17, 2004 but the scripture says swaminarayan bona fide...so not bogus teacher... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2004 Report Share Posted May 17, 2004 i have already said that i don't know much on swaminarayan i was only saying that following a bogus guru gives no advancement and the sincerity of a disciple of him is not real sincerity abour swaminarayan... i have not heard anything about him by srila prabhupada or other gaudya vaishnava acharias.. and i have read many devotees who do not agree on his autenticity my opinion is that if one want to advertise his master as real master or even GOD.. he has to demonstrate it scripturally and logically and he has also to demonstrate that the scripture is authentic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2004 Report Share Posted May 18, 2004 skanda purana is one of the 18 puranas...of course it's authentic... i dunno what more to say...i mean, do u want the original scripture from india or something? he's not GOD he's an incarnation...(if that skanda purana is true...) the fact is i dunno where to get a genuine copy of the skanda purana, so i'll admit that i dunno for sure if he is predicted...but hey, swaminarayana said Krishna is supreme source of all incarnations, so i don't think he's fake...the followers have twisted his teachings to make him out to be above krishna, but swaminarayan NEVER said that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2004 Report Share Posted May 18, 2004 the fact is i dunno where to get a genuine copy of the skanda purana, so i'll admit that i dunno for sure if he is predicted... that's enough for me... hare krishna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2004 Report Share Posted May 19, 2004 same goes for the scripts where caitanys were predicted...like garuda purana...i mean the ones where the word caitanya is explicitly mentioned... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2004 Report Share Posted May 19, 2004 caitanya is mentioned in other many places and his worship is sustained by absolutely trusty masters and scholars if your proposal is.. let's stop to worship both swaminarayan and chaitanya because they're not sufficiently documented.. i surely do not agree and i stick to the one accepted by gaudya vaishnava sampradaya.... sri chaitanya mahaprabhu so "stop to worship anyone" or "let's worship everyone" are both not for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 how one discriminate between the skanda purana and garuda purana? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 i discriminate the tradition as a whole... but there's no problem, if you demonstrate that swaminarayan is authentic or god, i am ready to accept it surely i will not accept it on " ... why not? there's doubt even on chaitanya mahaprabhu!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 then u must admit that there is a lack of logic in your thinking... what do u base acceptance of caitanya on? u seen the authentic original scripture with his prediction? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2004 Report Share Posted May 20, 2004 what do u base acceptance of caitanya on? TRADITION Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 faith + knowledge = spiritual science blind faith + following tradition = nescience i'm not saying caitanya is not an expansion of krishna, i'm just saying that we must think with reason... i feel caitanya is an expansion of krishna, because i have seen many quotes from scriptures saying 'born on banks of ganges, will chant the holy names, will be born to saci' some even say the name caitanya, but they are from puranas that have not been translated and written out authentically like garuda purana... with swaminarayan, there is only one quote, from skanda purana...and that doesn't explicitly mention his name, although it mentions his parent's names....this is the original swaminarayan predicted (19th century), not the one at the moment... so maybe he is an incarnation/shaktyavesa jiva of krishna, we just don't know... Let's not criticise Swaminarayan himself, we can criticise his followers for having decided that he is Supreme Lord... Swaminarayan would INSIST that his followers not say he is God, he even sent one of his closest followers away for insisting that he was God...so he was a humble saint, that is arguably predicted in the Vedas...also, he said himself in his 108th instruction 'I pray to Krishna the source of all incarnations'... What is interesting is how u believe in Caitanya as a tradition, I always thought Krishna consciousness is not a tradition, it is a spiritual science...you get info from higher authority (vedas), you carry out the experiment (chant), and u see the result (slowly our we experience taste for Krishna)... Haribol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 21, 2004 Report Share Posted May 21, 2004 blind faith + following tradition = nescience ....blind faith and following tradition are opposite concepts, they cannot stay together i feel caitanya is an expansion of krishna..................but they are from puranas that have not been translated and written out authentically like garuda purana... ...there's also other quotings, but the principal fact is that there's a tradition of exalted masters and disciples who are sending people back to godhead following sri chaitanya mahaprabhu from 1500 ac.. so another way to demonstrate mahaprabhu's authenticity is to check if his followers are offering an authentic way to discover the self and find god. with swaminarayan, there is only one quote, from skanda purana...and that doesn't explicitly mention his name, although it mentions his parent's names....this is the original swaminarayan predicted (19th century), not the one at the moment... so maybe he is an incarnation/shaktyavesa jiva of krishna, we just don't know... ....if we don't know what's the use to make hypotesys? maybe he's, maybe he's not, maybe my uncle is god, maybe he's not... "maybe" is not a source of consciousness or culture Let's not criticise Swaminarayan himself, we can criticise his followers for having decided that he is Supreme Lord... ...there's nothing to criticize, an incarnation of god or a master has to be accepted from bona fide informations given from bona fide people What is interesting is how u believe in Caitanya as a tradition, I always thought Krishna consciousness is not a tradition, it is a spiritual science... ...are the terms tradition and science opposite? you get info from higher authority (vedas), ..under the guidance of guru and previous acharyas (=sadhu=tradition) you carry out the experiment (chant) ...with the useful advices and after connected to the parampara' (=sadhus=tradition) by the spiritual master and u see the result (slowly our we experience taste for Krishna)... ..if we want to see some real result there''s to connect ourselves to the parampara' (=sadhus=tradition).. we cannot realize krsna separately from guru and sadhus (=the tradition) guru-sadhu-sastra haribol (tradition means "to carry......." the message of krsna from He to us (master to disciple, to disciple, to disciple..... and so on...).. parampara Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 15, 2004 Report Share Posted June 15, 2004 PLease note that in the last email you reference "....this is the original swaminarayan predicted (19th century), not the one at the moment..." There is only one Swaminarayan the one who was born in the 19th Century, but thru +the years the swaminarayan sect has split into various branches, of the 2 main sects, one Believes that only the original Shajanand Swami, was god, but the sect with the biggest following currently "Aksharpursotam" also believe thier current leader to be "GOD". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2004 Report Share Posted June 19, 2004 The Akshar Purushottam followers,they don't believe their guru as god but they believe that god resides "within" their guru.Our guru is in the purest state i.e., Brahmic State and we believe him to Brahm and Lord SwamiNarayan to be ParaBrahm.SwamiNarayan = Swami(Brahm)+Narayan(ParaBrahm). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Please chant the mahamantra, you may not accept mahaprabhu although there are many quotes and you may accept swaminarayan thru 1 quote, but one thing we do know is that krishna is the source of all incarnations (shikshapatri 108) in depth information about krishna is given in the guadiya lineage, so at least thats one thing we agree on, so chant the names of krishna and be happy, theres no need to take risks by worshipping swaminarayan or any other incarnation and trying so hard to prove him (rather than accepting whats already available), they all say worship krishna so please do it and go back to godhead. We have limited time and intelligence choice the clear path and krishna will reciprocate. Hari Hari Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2004 Report Share Posted July 20, 2004 Please read the text "VACHANAMRUT" in which Lord has told every thing clearly about his Supreme being. If u read SwamiNarayan Bhagwan's life history - There is an Incident where Lord sings out a Phrase composed by Kabir- "Koti Krshna jode hath, Koti Shiv Dhare Dhyan, Koti Brahma Kathe Gnan ane SadGuru khele vasant".After singing this Phrase, he asks the people that Who is such a SadGuru then every one replies that-"Lord! You are such a SadGuru".But Lord SwamiNarayan says- "Such a SadGuru is my Choicest devotee Gunatitanand Swami(Who is the Avatar of Brahman) and I am even above that Purna Purushottam Narayan(ParaBrahman)" See above Maya are only two Entites and they are Brahman and ParaBrahman. I am not against you but Vachanamrut has Solution to all the Questions if u Understand it Properly. There is also an incident described in Sreemad Bhagvat that When Krishna Bhagwan entered the darkness of Maya then his Sudarshan Chakra (Which had the radiance and energy worth 10000 suns) appeared as a mere lantern. Such is the power of Maya and these two above mentioned Entites lie Above Maya. JAI SWAMINARAYAN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 20, 2004 Report Share Posted July 20, 2004 When Krishna Bhagwan entered the darkness of Maya then his Sudarshan Chakra (Which had the radiance and energy worth 10000 suns) appeared as a mere lantern... nonense... krsna does not enters in maya bring the volume, chapter, verse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts