Can it Be That the Hare Krishnas Are Not Hindu?

[Guest guest]

Can it Be That the Hare

Krishnas Are Not Hindu?

From Hinduism Today Magazine, Oct. 1998

 

ISKCON's Srila Prabhupada's edicts on religion are clear

 

There is a misconception," wrote His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada in 1977 in Science of Self Realization, "that the Krishna consciousness movement represents the Hindu religion. Sometimes Indians both inside and outside of India think that we are preaching the Hindu religion, but actually we are not." In chapter three of the book [available from Bhaktivedanta Archives, P.O. Box 255, Sandy Ridge, North Carolina 27046 USA], this startling point is made several times: "The Krishna consciousness movement has nothing to do with the Hindu religion or any system of religion.... One should clearly understand that the Krishna consciousness movement is not preaching the so-called Hindu religion."

 

Followers of Srila Prabhupada have assembled all of his letters, books, lectures, interviews and conversations on the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase [also available from Bhaktivedanta Archives]. This CD-Rom database yielded 183 references to Hinduism, which were compiled and analyzed to understand Srila Prabhupada's point of view.

 

Often Srila Prabhupada would simply deny the existence of a religion called "Hinduism." He attributed the improper designation to "foreign invaders." At other times he acknowledged the existence of the faith, but considered it a hopelessly degraded form of the original Sanatana Dharma of the Vedas. In his April, 1967, New York lectures he remarked, "Although posing as great scholars, ascetics, householders and swamis, the so-called followers of the Hindu religion are all useless, dried-up branches of the Vedic religion." ISKCON, he believed, was the only true exponent of the Vedic faith today. In an interview given for Bhavan's Journal on June 28, 1976, he said, "India, they have given up the real religious system, Sanatana Dharma. Fictitiously, they have accepted a hodgepodge thing which is called Hinduism. Therefore there is trouble."

 

The Guru frequently explained his position, and acted upon his beliefs in establishing his dynamic society. At a 1974 Mumbai lecture, he declared, "We are not preaching Hindu religion. While registering the association, I purposely kept this name, 'Krishna Consciousness,' neither Hindu religion nor Christian nor Buddhist religion."

 

Srila Prabhupada was aware that the Indian community had a mistaken impression of his Hinduness. In a 1970 letter to a temple administrator in Los Angeles, he wrote, "The Hindu community in the West has got some good feeling for me because superficially they are seeing that I am spreading Hindu religion, but factually this Krishna Consciousness movement is neither Hindu religion nor any other religion." That remains the case today, for Srila Prabhupada left no successor with the authority to change his spiritual edicts.

 

So why does the general Hindu community mistakenly believe that ISKCON is a Hindu organization, when it never describes itself as such? Well, it sometimes does. During the recent ISKCON temple openings in New Delhi and Bangalore, where newspaper reports frequently identified the grand temples as Hindu, the ISKCON press releases, such as that of April 15, 1998, never used the H word. Yet, when Indian devotees serving at each of those temples were asked in late July by journalists for this article, they said it is a Hindu temple. The discrepancy between public perception and internal policy is further confused by the group's official exceptions to the non-Hindu position. Faced with difficulties, ISKCON leaders have appealed to the Hindu community to back them up, as in a dispute over the Bhaktivedanta Manor in the UK or when being hassled by Christians in Russia and Poland. In appeals to judges and governments, the word Hindu is openly used. In other legal cases, including one to the US Supreme Court, ISKCON has attempted to counteract the "cult" label by claiming to be a traditional Hindu lineage, and asked other Hindus to affirm this in the courts. Other organizations who parted company with Hinduism, such as Transcendental Meditation and Brahma Kumaris, do not compromise their position under any circumstances.

 

What also sets ISKCON apart is its open repudiation and criticism of Hinduism, especially among members. There are reports of Hindus who joined ISKCON only to be taught to reject their family's religion. "Previously we were Hindus. Now we are Hare Krishnas," some said. At the same time, the organization often appeals to the Hindu community and businessmen for financial support of its social programs and political help to protect ISKCON from detractors.

 

Considering ISKCON's appearances--member's dress, names, bhajana, festivals, worship, scripture, pilgrimage, temple building, and so forth--it's little wonder that so many have assumed they are Hindus. To find out they are not will certainly surprise many--Hindus and non-Hindus alike. It may even surprise a few Hare Krishnas themselves.

 

[Guest guest]

Prabhupada has no right to talk about hinduism. He can praise his cult as much as possible without commenting on any other religion.

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Prabhupada has no right to talk about hinduism. He can praise his cult as much as possible without commenting on any other religion.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is a great saint. Learn to show some respect here. Is this what your Gurus teach ? Learn to be a good student first.

[Guest guest]

Saints dont talk so bad about anything. Further when he can comment on adi sankara and others as mayavadhi without any respect what they have done. Where does his respect go ?

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Saints dont talk so bad about anything. Further when he can comment on adi sankara and others as mayavadhi without any respect what they have done. Where does his respect go ?

 

 

It is not just Srila Prabhpada who called Adi Shankara's teaching as Mayavadha. So did Ramanujacharya, Madhvacharya, Raghavendraswamy and every other Vaishnava saint. Their accusation is based on accurate knowledge of advaitam and not based on emotional rantings like you make.

[Guest guest]

Different philosophies were given at different time for need of the time. each philosophy is for people with that level of understanding. U need to grow from that level. Iam not ranting out of emotion .May be prabhupada got emotional when he said these words

 

"Although posing as great scholars, ascetics, householders and swamis, the so-called followers of the Hindu religion are all useless, dried-up branches of the Vedic religion."

[Guest guest]

When ISKON needs help and backing, they will look forward to hindus. But when their job gets done, they talk the other way.

 

And another point is Vaishnavas dont apply the same standards to all sects.

 

And in the Vaishnava sects only they have such an attitude.

 

This is what I call opportunism.

 

"Prabhupada has no right to talk about hinduism. He can praise his cult as much as possible without commenting on any other religion. "

 

Yes you are right. He is out of hinduism and hence he cannot comment on it.

[Guest guest]

*****Hare Krishna,

 

 

In reply to:

--

 

Prabhupada has no right to talk about hinduism. He can praise his cult as much as possible without commenting on any other religion.

 

 

--

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada is a great saint. Learn to show some respect here. Is this what your Gurus teach ? Learn to be a good student first.**************

 

Where is disrespect here?

This guest just says, Prabhupada cannot comment on hinduism as he is not a hindu at all. Whats wrong?

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Different philosophies were given at different time for need of the time. each philosophy is for people with that level of understanding. U need to grow from that level. Iam not ranting out of emotion .May be prabhupada got emotional when he said these words

 

"Although posing as great scholars, ascetics, householders and swamis, the so-called followers of the Hindu religion are all useless, dried-up branches of the Vedic religion."

 

 

The quote talks about truth. Are there not sanyasis(posing like sanyasis) puffing ganja in many holy places. Are there not the so called sanyasis making a living out of religion. Srila Prabhpada is talking about these fake people and why did you think he is insulting perhaps your guru ?

 

As for refering a saint irreverently with his name is disrespect. Srila Prabhupada's life itself proves he is a saint.

 

As for HIS comments on Hinduism, Srila Prabhupada has every right to comment on sects mis-interpreting Vedas.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

 

Wish ppls would understand Iskcon is part of Gaudiya Math,

viz. Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya

 

Brahma==Lord Brahma--Date (unknown)

Madhva==Madhvacharya--AD 1238

Gaudiya==Lord Caitanya--15th Century

 

Disiplic Succession continues through the Centurys..

 

Present Day:

 

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura--thought up the process of how to spread the cult of Caitanya Mahaprabhu,

 

Srila Gaura Kishora Das Babaji Maharaja--diciple of Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Guru Maharaja of..

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarawati--life-long brahmachari, spiritual master of Various disciples, incluing srila Bhakti Vaibhava Puri Maharaja, and Srila Sridhara Maharaja and..

 

Srila A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada--disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada, w/ the order of his spritual master spread Krsna Consiosness to all the world, thus keeping his Guru Maharaja order, which Srila Prabhupada's disciples carry out to this very day.

 

[Guest guest]

**********As for refering a saint irreverently with his name is disrespect. Srila Prabhupada's life itself proves he is a saint. ************

 

So Shankara was not a saint?

It was Shankara who was subjected to disrespect first in this forum.

 

And one of your followers called Swami Chinmayananda as " Some Chinmayananda" and " Mr. Chinmayananda"

 

So read all the posts carefully before making any Arai Vekkadu comments.

 

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

So Shankara was not a saint?

It was Shankara who was subjected to disrespect first in this forum.

 

And one of your followers called Swami Chinmayananda as " Some Chinmayananda" and " Mr. Chinmayananda"

 

 

 

I do not disrespect any saint. I know Swami Chinmayananda and surely Sri Adi Sankara are great saints eventhough I do not think their philosophies are right.

 

As for refering a Swami by name is disprespect. You agree with that. Then why did you refer Srila Prabhupada with his name irreverently ? I know somebody else referred to Swami Chinmayananda irreverently ? The question is why did you follow that ? and even tried to defend that point while in case of Swami Chinamayananda I saw many advaitists jumping on Gokul.

[Guest guest]

This guest just says, Prabhupada cannot comment on hinduism as he is not a hindu at all. Whats wrong?

 

the wrong is that a mahatma can comment on everything and we have the duty to listen and learn

[Guest guest]

Belief differs for your Prabhupada might be a guru.For me i dont think so . When he can comment on adi sankara and others then he has done the mistake which you say that i did by using his name. Further comparing prabhupada in the lineage of the great acharyas you mentioned is far-fetched.

[Guest guest]

Especially when Adi Shankara single handedly established hinduism back in India by routing buddhism, that too without violence.

 

If not for adi Shankara, we would all be chanting "Buddham Charanam Gacchhami, Dhammam Charanam Gachhami".

 

And look at all the disrespect and abuses hindus are subjected to.

 

 

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Belief differs for your Prabhupada might be a guru.For me i dont think so . When he can comment on adi sankara and others then he has done the mistake which you say that i did by using his name. Further comparing prabhupada in the lineage of the great acharyas you mentioned is far-fetched.

 

 

His comment was on advaita and not on sri Adi Sankara. Infact Gaudiyas and ISKCON believe that Sri Adi Sankara is Lord Shiva HIMSELF, the greatest Vaishnava. So I don't think Srila Prabhupada ever disrespected Sri Adi Sankara. You guys are imagining things.

 

 

Especially when Adi Shankara single handedly established hinduism back in India by routing buddhism, that too without violence.

 

If not for adi Shankara, we would all be chanting "Buddham Charanam Gacchhami, Dhammam Charanam Gachhami".

 

And look at all the disrespect and abuses hindus are subjected to.

 

 

There is almost no literature of Sri Adi Sankara on Buddhism. Why ?

 

Because Buddhism was already dead. Go to Kanchi mutt website. You will find details.

[Guest guest]

Lord Shiva a vaishnava ? Since when ?

[Guest guest]

...because Adi Shankara did a selfless service and did not want to record them to blow his own trumpet.

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Lord Shiva a vaishnava ? Since when ?

 

 

I don't know, but I think since HE gained all HIS powers after worshipping Lord Vishnu as per the following Sruti.

 

Rig Veda 7:40:5

 

asya devasya mILhuSo vayA viSNoreSasya prabhRthe havirbhiH

vide hi rudro rudriyaM mahitvaM yAsiSTaM vartirashvinAvirAvat

 

With offerings I propitiate the branches of this swift-moving God, the bounteous Visnu.

Hence Rudra gained his Rudra-strength: O Asvins, ye sought the house that hath celestial viands.

 

 

...because Adi Shankara did a selfless service and did not want to record them to blow his own trumpet.

 

 

or may be Buddhists were non-existent during Sri Adi Shankara's time. Infact this is what is taught by advaitists themselves. You can check the teachings of Sri Chandrasekarendra Saraswati.

[Guest guest]

the important thing is that your great ignorance on judging srila swami prabupada is exposed

 

he never insulted sri shankaracharya, you are insulting sri shankaracharya when you criticize prabhupada

 

shankaracharya said "bhaja govinda...." and prabhupada carried this instruction spreading govinda nama all over the world

[Guest guest]

Raghuraman

 

Reading any scripture literally you can make them sound like whatever you want. The meaning of "Jihad" is understood in wrong way and there is choas in this world now.So dont take literal meaning of anything and try to follow it. Since scriptures have come a long way lot of additions and modifications would have been made. Are you following all that is said in Vedas. Are you following what is said about "Panchakavyam" in the vedas ?

If shiva regained power from vishnu then y shld rama pray to him in rameshwaram. Next thing you would say is its "Tamasic" scriptures .

 

[Raguraman]

Hare Krishna,

 

 

Reading any scripture literally you can make them sound like whatever you want. The meaning of "Jihad" is understood in wrong way and there is choas in this world now.So dont take literal meaning of anything and try to follow it. Since scriptures have come a long way lot of additions and modifications would have been made.

 

 

 

Oh. So Sruti was altered. So how do you know what is the actual teaching of Vedas. The verse is clear about Lord Rudr's position.

 

 

Are you following all that is said in Vedas. Are you following what is said about "Panchakavyam" in the vedas ?

If shiva regained power from vishnu then y shld rama pray to him in rameshwaram. Next thing you would say is its "Tamasic" scriptures .

 

 

http://www.dvaita.org/list/list_50/msg00078.html

 

The hArItasmR^iti (See P.S 2) says:

 

yatra rudrArchanaM bhasmadhAraNaM prochyate budhaiH |

tadabrahmaNyaviShayaM viprANAM tu na karhichit.h ||

 

where Shivalingarchana and bhasmadhAraNA is prohibited for non-brahmin

castes.

 

Also, the following smR^iti vAkya clarifies that Shiva is a kshatriya:

yAnyetAni devatrAkshAtrANi indro varuNassomo rudraH parjanyo yamo

mR^ityorIshAna'. But the statement 'yo vai svAM devatAmatiyajete' enjoins

that one worship a deity befitting one's nature; so can the Purushottama

Rama worship anybody?

 

It cannot be said that shivArchana and shivalingArchana are allowed for

Kshatriyas, just because Sri Rama worshipped Shiva. Such an argument would

have been worthy only if it is not obstructed by other pramANAs. On the

contrary, the Padma purana says:

 

ahamapyavatAreShu tvAM cha rudra mahAbala |

tAmasAnAM mohanArthaM pUjayAmi yuge yuge ||

 

in the 'tAraka-brahma-rAja-samhitA', Vishnu says that he would, for the sake

of deluding the tAmasAs, worship Rudra in his avatArAs and people will be

deluded by such an adhArmic act.

 

Moreover, the following statements:

 

Shiva seeks:

anyadevaM varaM dehi prasiddhaM sarvajantuShu |

martyo bhUtvA bhavAneva mama sAdhaya keshava ||

mAM bhajasva cha devesha varaM matto gR^ihANa cha |

yenA.ahaM sarvabhUtAnAM pUjyAtpUjyataro.abhavam.h ||

 

Vishnu says:

devakAryAvatAreShu mAnuShatvamupeyivAn.h |

tvAmevArAdhayiShyAmi mama tvaM varado bhava ||

 

in the Rudra-gItA section of the varAha purANa (and a similar incident in

the kUrma purANa) narrate Shiva's obtaining the boon of being worshipped by

the Lord in his incarnations. Thus, just like the Lord granted the boon of

being the charioteer to Arjuna, here too, his bestowing such a boon should

be seen as an indication of His easy accessibility to his devotees

(Ashrita-saulabhya-pradarshAnarthatvena) and not as a hindrance to his being

the parameshvara.

 

Thus the linga purANa's statements on Rama worshipping Shiva should be seen

in the light of the boon granted to the latter by Vishnu. Also, just like

Rama bowed to Vishvamitra, Bharadvaja, Agastya, so too, does Rama bowed to

Shiva (with the above background kept in mind). Thus there is no obstruction

to Lord Rama being the para-brahma!

[Guest guest]

If shiva regained power from vishnu then y shld rama pray to him in rameshwaram.

 

to show the correct behaviour to humans, for example he could have solved all the ramayana affair in a second, he went through all this struggle to teach us many spiritual and material values

 

the same with lord siva drinking poison ocean.. he could have found any other system to save humans, but he wanted to do like that.. so there's many lilas, to understand who is the supreme and who is he subordinate we have to study seriously

[Guest guest]

Raghuramanji

 

Doesnt Krishna himself says in Gita that for a wise man , vedas is like well in place already sorrounded by water. So vedas are not necessary to reach mukthi . Then why hold on to that . All these puranas u mentioned are made by the vaishanavas so surely it will contain what they need. For a seeker of truth all this will not help.

[Guest guest]

so vedas are useless, puranas are useless?

 

well

 

if you like at least bhagavad gita, krsna says "surrender to me...."