Conversion

animesh · August 14, 2001

Sabrina ji,

There are many Hindus who do not generally use the word Hindu for them. There are two reasons for this. One is the origin of the term "hindu". As you might have read, the term originated from the word "Sindhu". Therefore, its meaning when it originated and its meaning at present are different. Even if we want to forget how the term originated and concentrate on its meaning at present, then also there is another reason as to why some do not call themselves as Hindus. That reason being that the word "hindu" is very generic. So, to be more specific, some call themselves as Shaivas, Vaishnavas etc. Some may like to use even more specific terms like "Gaudiya Vaishnavas". Lest you should start thinking that there are no similarities between Hindus of these different beliefs, let me say that you will see differences only if you go into details of these beliefs. Otherwise there are many-many similarities. Consider festivals. There are many festivals which are celebrated by Hindus of almost all beliefs. Of course, there are festivals which are celebrated by people of some groups but not by others. Hindus of different belief systems may consider worship different deities. But they consider other deities as also worshippable. As an example, people who belong to ISKCON may worship Lord Kishna the most. But they do consider other deities also as worshippable, if not to the same extent as Krishna.

So, it is not possible to answer how one can become a Hindu. But if you want to know how one can belong to a specific group of Hindus, then the answer depends on the group.

If you want to know more about Hinduism in general, I think you can start with knowing festivals celebrated by Hindus and significance of those festivals.

I have one question for you:

You are a female. Why is your name Sabrina King? Why not Sabrina Queen or Sabrina Princess?

Gauracandra · August 14, 2001

Here are some interesting facts. According to the surveys I have read 90-95% of all Americans believe in God. Yet these same surveys show that only less than 50% of people attend some church, synagogue, mosque or temple fairly often. Lets just use the figures of 90% believe and 50% attend for simple mathematics. This would suggest a 40 percentage point gap. This is a damning statistic in that it suggests over 120 million Americans would like to live a more spiritual life but find no appeal in the religious institutions they are familiar.

I would suggest the reason in one of mood. I'm reminded of a devotee I met years back who used to be Muslim. He was raised muslim, but eventually left. He just floated through life with no particular spiritual connection. When he finally came in contact with the devotees and saw the deities his heart just jumped for joy. Finally he saw God in a form that attracted his heart. With a sweet smile, lotus eyes, and with a girl friend (a feminine aspect of God was in fact a key point that he thought was missing). So the beauty attracted him. It fit his mood. At the same time, many black americans in the inner city are being attracted to Islam. Why? Well the inner city in the U.S. tends to be a mess, with crime, drugs, sex etc... and so they see the discipline, and strictness of Islam as being attractive. It fits their mood of what it is they need in spiritual life.

I am also reminded of a statistic I read in a book about the Hare Krsna devotees. It was written in the mid to late 70s by a professor. He notes one statistic that 50% of all devotees were already vegetarian before they came to the movement. Now 1% of the general population is vegetarian, yet 50% of devotees were already vegetarian. This suggests that their values were simply confirmed and this is one of the reasons they joined. No doubt they looked at other religions of their youth and found it didn't match with their own values. And now here was a religion that did.

Just a few thoughts. The mood of the devotee is important in this respect. Srila Prabhupada brought a unique mood that appeals to many people, and gives them a sense of hope, light, and beauty.

Gauracandra

shvu · August 14, 2001

Sources are any Vaisnava's literature.You don't accept the personalist viewpoint so why would I waste time trying to convince you.Just as you would be wasting time trying to convince me of the impersonalist path

Let me explain. India has lots of Shaivas and Shaktas as well. They are all 'personal', as you put it. I take it you are aware that a person can worship Gods other than Krishna and still be 'personalists'.

The southern states of Karnataka and tamilnadu are predominantly shaivite. Now according to your logic, they are not "finely" expressing Sanathana dharma. Why? Because they are not vaishnavas. So it would mean that if they switch over to worshipping Vishnu then they will begin to finely express Sanathana Dharma.

This is why I was wondering where you got the info from.

(btw a person can be a worshipper of Vishnu [Vaishnava] and still be an 'impersonalist')

Cheers

August 14, 2001

Gauracandra:

...1% of the general population is vegetarian, yet 50% of devotees were already vegetarian. This suggests that their values were simply confirmed and this is one of the reasons they joined (Prabhupada's Iskcon).

...the inner city in the U.S. tends to be a mess, with crime, drugs, sex etc... and so they see the discipline, and strictness of Islam as being attractive.

Satyaraj: These are indeed very interesting thoughts: Vegetarians feel some attraction towards Prabhupada's religion, righteous people towards Islam, pacifists towards Buddhism, etc.

But Krsna's opinion concerning all kind religions' preferences invoked by material attractions is stated in Gita (18.66): "Simply reject all these religions and fully surrender yourself to Me."

Maitreya · August 14, 2001

Originally posted by talasiga:

These emotions are the substance of the soul

Those who turn towards the Divine

see the illumination within them

Those who turn away

see shadows

The Vallabhi-s host many spiritual masters

With their art of Raag music

they explore these emotions

to their very Source

Have you heard this mysterious music

Played at different times of the day

Or might you have seen It

In that One Glance

of Abhay Charan De ?

Bhairavi Thumri talasiga@hotmail.com

Talasiga,you are really on today,

Run with it,

Dance with it,

Sing with it,

Let your words play.

Maitreya · August 14, 2001

Originally posted by shvu:

(btw a person can be a worshipper of Vishnu [Vaishnava] and still be an 'impersonalist')

Cheers

shvu, I accept that Vaisnavism in its proper full expression is a post liberation activity.It is completely without motivation for gain of any kind including mukti.

I know some like to pick a murti of some deva and try to ride their worship of that deity into the deity and merge therein thinking they will become the deity.They call that bhakti-yoga.They call themselves vaisnavas perhaps.

You also know that that definition of Vaisnavism is not accepted by all.I don't accept it myself.You seem to.So it is not possible for me to convince you or you to convince me.Leaving us, in a friendly way, agreeing to disagree.

Hare Krishna,

Maitreya

shvu · August 14, 2001

You also know that that definition of Vaisnavism is not accepted by all.

I don't know that at all. I am not aware of a word having a different meaning to one set of people and a different meaning to another set. A word has to have one correct meaning common to everyone.

Hinduism has 3 major groups, Vaishnava, Shaiva and Shakta. If you disgree with the basic meaning of Vaishnava, how do you define the term, Shaiva?

Thanx

Maitreya · August 14, 2001

Originally posted by shvu:

This is why I was wondering where you got the info from.

Cheers

shvu, from the introduction to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is by Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Hare Krishna

August 14, 2001

Maitreya: ...from the introduction to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is by Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Satyaraj: So, he gave you a false info, as Badarayana Rsi (Vedanta-sutra) and all Vedanta-acaryas including Baladeva state that Hari is personal and impersonal. Both things! Therefore there are also Vaisnavas who worship His impersonal form and aren't simple rascals, idiots, atheists, karmis, proto-vaisnavas, demons, and other terms that are often employed by Bhaktivedanta Swami to term all sort of impersonalists.

Maitreya · August 14, 2001

This is the section of Prabhupada's introduction to the Bhagavad-gita that I refered to:

That destination is called the sanätana sky, the eternal, spiritual sky. In this material world we find that everything is temporary. It comes into being, stays for some time, produces some by-products, dwindles and then vanishes. That is the law of the material world, whether we use as an example this body, or a piece of fruit or anything. But beyond this temporary world there is another world of which we have information. That world consists of another nature, which is sanätana, eternal. Jiva is also described as sanätana, eternal, and the Lord is also described as sanätana in the Eleventh Chapter. We have an intimate relationship with the Lord, and because we are all qualitatively one—the sanätana-dhäma, or sky, the sanätana Supreme Personality and the sanätana living entities—the whole purpose of Bhagavad-gitä is to revive our sanätana occupation, or sanätana-dharma, which is the eternal occupation of the living entity. We are temporarily engaged in different activities, but all of these activities can be purified when we give up all these temporary activities and take up the activities which are prescribed by the Supreme Lord. That is called our pure life.

The Supreme Lord and His transcendental abode are both sanätana, as are the living entities, and the combined association of the Supreme Lord and the living entities in the sanätana abode is the perfection of human life. The Lord is very kind to the living entities because they are His sons. Lord Krsna declares in Bhagavad-gétä, sarva-yoniñu. .. ahaà béja-pradaù pitä: “I am the father of all.” Of course there are all types of living entities according to their various karmas, but here the Lord claims that He is the father of all of them. Therefore the Lord descends to reclaim all of these fallen, conditioned souls, to call them back to the sanätana eternal sky so that the sanätana living entities may regain their eternal sanätana positions in eternal association with the Lord. The Lord comes Himself in different incarnations, or He sends His confidential servants as sons or His associates or äcäryas to reclaim the conditioned souls.

Therefore, sanätana-dharma does not refer to any sectarian process of religion. It is the eternal function of the eternal living entities in relationship with the eternal Supreme Lord. Sanätana-dharma refers, as stated previously, to the eternal occupation of the living entity. Sripäda Rämänujäcärya has explained the word sanätana as “that which has neither beginning nor end,” so when we speak of sanätana-dharma, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripäda Rämänujäcärya that it has neither beginning nor end.

The English world religion is a little different from sanätana-dharma. Religion conveys the idea of faith, and faith may change. One may have faith in a particular process, and he may change this faith and adopt another, but sanätana-dharma refers to that activity which cannot be changed. For instance, liquidity cannot be taken from water, nor can heat be taken from fire. Similarly, the eternal function of the eternal living entity cannot be taken from the living entity. Sanätana-dharma is eternally integral with the living entity. When we speak of sanätana-dharma, therefore, we must take it for granted on the authority of Sripäda Rämänujäcärya that it has neither beginning nor end. That which has neither end nor beginning must not be sectarian, for it cannot be limited by any boundaries. Those belonging to some sectarian faith will wrongly consider that sanätana-dharma is also sectarian, but if we go deeply into the matter and consider it in the light of modern science, it is possible for us to see that sanätana-dharma is the business of all the people of the world—nay, of all the living entities of the universe.

Non-sanätana religious faith may have some beginning in the annals of human history, but there is no beginning to the history of sanätana-dharma, because it remains eternally with the living entities. Insofar as the living entities are concerned, the authoritative sästras state that the living entity has neither birth nor death. In the Gitä it is stated that the living entity is never born and he never dies. He is eternal and indestructible, and he continues to live after the destruction of his temporary material body. In reference to the concept of sanätana-dharma, we must try to understand the concept of religion from the Sanskrit root meaning of the word. Dharma refers to that which is constantly existing with a particular object. We conclude that there is heat and light along with the fire; without heat and light, there is no meaning to the word fire. Similarly, we must discover the essential part of the living being, that part which is his constant companion. That constant companion is his eternal quality, and that eternal quality is his eternal religion.

When Sanätana Gosvämi asked Sri Caitanya Mahäprabhu about the svarüpa of every living being, the Lord replied that the svarüpa, or constitutional position, of the living being is the rendering of service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If we analyze this statement of Lord Caitanya’s, we can easily see that every living being is constantly engaged in rendering service to another living being. A living being serves other living beings in various capacities. By doing so, the living entity enjoys life. The lower animals serve human beings as servants serve their master. A serves B master, B serves C master, and C serves D master and so on. Under these circumstances, we can see that one friend serves another friend, the mother serves the son, the wife serves the husband, the husband serves the wife and so on. If we go on searching in this spirit, it will be seen that there is no exception in the society of living beings to the activity of service. The politician presents his manifesto for the public to convince them of his capacity for service. The voters therefore give the politician their valuable votes, thinking that he will render valuable service to society. The shopkeeper serves the customer, and the artisan serves the capitalist. The capitalist serves the family, and the family serves the state in the terms of the eternal capacity of the eternal living being. In this way we can see that no living being is exempt from rendering service to other living beings, and therefore we can safely conclude that service is the constant companion of the living being and that the rendering of service is the eternal religion of the living being.

Yet man professes to belong to a particular type of faith with reference to particular time and circumstance and thus claims to be a Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or an adherent of any other sect. Such designations are non—sanätana-dharma. A Hindu may change his faith to become a Muslim, or a Muslim may change his faith to become a Hindu, or a Christian may change his faith and so on. But in all circumstances the change of religious faith does not affect the eternal occupation of rendering service to others. The Hindu, Muslim or Christian in all circumstances is servant of someone. Thus, to profess a particular type of faith is not to profess one’s sanätana-dharma. The rendering of service is sanätana-dharma.

Factually we are related to the Supreme Lord in service. The Supreme Lord is the supreme enjoyer, and we living entities are His servitors. We are created for His enjoyment, and if we participate in that eternal enjoyment with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we become happy. We cannot become happy otherwise. It is not possible to be happy independently, just as no one part of the body can be happy without cooperating with the stomach. It is not possible for the living entity to be happy without rendering transcendental loving service unto the Supreme Lord.

In the Bhagavad-gitä, worship of different demigods or rendering service to them is not approved. It is stated in the Seventh Chapter, twentieth verse:

kämais tais tair håta-jïänäù

prapadyante ’nya-devatäù

taà taà niyamam ästhäya

prakåtyä niyatäù svayä

“Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures.” Here it is plainly said that those who are directed by lust worship the demigods and not the Supreme Lord Krsna. When we mention the name Krsna, we do not refer to any sectarian name. Krsna means the highest pleasure, and it is confirmed that the Supreme Lord is the reservoir or storehouse of all pleasure. We are all hankering after pleasure. Änanda-mayo ’bhyäsät (Vedänta-sütra 1.1.12). The living entities, like the Lord, are full of consciousness, and they are after happiness. The Lord is perpetually happy, and if the living entities associate with the Lord, cooperate with Him and take part in His association, then they also become happy.

Hare Krishna

MC

August 14, 2001

Maitreya: The rendering of service is sanätana-dharma. Factually we are related to the Supreme Lord in service. The Supreme Lord is the supreme enjoyer, and we living entities are His servitors. We are created for His enjoyment, and if we participate in that eternal enjoyment with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we become happy. (by Bhaktivedanta Swami)

Satyaraj: Badarayana Rsi states that Hari is both personal and impersonal. Which of these two aspects are that Supreme Personality of Godhead? If one argue that only the personal aspect is that Supreme Personality of Godhead he is denying sruti, as Hari is both aspects.

So, the whole text is only a theology by Bhaktivedanta Swami, and it is contrary to sruti text. That is to say; that kind of theology that try to explain Hari's 'modus operandi' is only a fallacy according to Badarayana Rsi's personal statements and all Vedanta-acaryas' opinion.

shvu · August 14, 2001

Maitreya,

Thanx for the followup. That is what I was looking for, when I asked for the source of your info.

Cheers

kailasa · August 14, 2001

>Satyaraj: Yes, you are quite right! This connection is merely emotional. That's to say, caused by material mind and its primitive attachments.

No one of you could support the thesis of His Divine Grace's great contribution for the welfare of the humankind. Instead of it, it is clear that His Divine Grace kindly came to put some more fuel to the fire of the religious conflict among people. New name-calling expressions such as rascals, karmis, demons, atheists, to term the non-followers of his sect is all that we got.

It you with Shvu do of anxiety on an empty place. The girl has asked slightly about hinduism and you Have rushed in talk and from the chronic dissatisfaction began in next time to wear(defame), to paste shortcuts and all remaining. Has not bothered still? What there vedanta, looks how many garbage from YOU a two Takes off. Transcendentalist. C Transcendental by vision.

talasiga · August 14, 2001

Originally posted by Maitreya:

Let your words play.

While the words are out playing

Meaning is preparing their meal

When the Lord comes home

They will all dine together

talasiga@hotmail.com

Maitreya · August 14, 2001

Originally posted by talasiga:

While the words are out playing

Meaning is preparing their meal

When the Lord comes home

They will all dine together

Rather grand feast,

Or meal of simpler faire.

Words with loving meaning offered,

Dispell the hunger of despair.

August 15, 2001

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Maitreya: ...from the introduction to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is by Bhaktivedanta Swami.

Satyaraj: So, he gave you a false info , as Badarayana Rsi (Vedanta-sutra) and all Vedanta-acaryas including Baladeva state that Hari is personal and impersonal. Both things!

Therefore there are also Vaisnavas who worship His impersonal form and aren't simple rascals, idiots, atheists, karmis, proto-vaisnavas, demons, and other terms that are often employed by Bhaktivedanta Swami to term all sort of impersonalists.

kailasa · August 15, 2001

In the Chändogya Upaniñad (7.1.4), the Puräëas and

Mahäbhärata, generally known as histories, are mentioned as the fifth Veda.

After the Vedas were divided into four divisions, Paila Åñi became the

professor of the Åg Veda, Jaimini the professor of the Säma Veda, and

Vaiçampäyana alone became glorified by the Yajur Veda.

The Sumantu Muni Aìgirä, who was very devotedly engaged, was entrusted with

the Atharva Veda. And my father, Romaharñaëa, was entrusted with the Puräëas

and historical record

All these learned scholars, in their turn, rendered their entrusted Vedas

unto their many disciples, grand-disciples and great grand-disciples, and

thus the respective branches of the followers of the Vedas came into being.

Çréla Madhväcärya, commenting on the aphorism dåçyate tu (Vedänta-sütra

2.1.6), quotes the Bhaviñya Puräëa as follows:

åg-yajuù-sämätharväç ca

bhärataà païcarätrakam

müla-rämäyaëaà caiva

veda ity eva çabditäù

puräëäni ca yänéha

vaiñëaväni vido viduù

svataù-prämäëyam eteñäà

nätra kiïcid vicäryate

The Åg Veda, Yajur Veda, Säma Veda, Atharva Veda, Mahäbhärata, Païcarätra

and original Rämäyaëa are all considered Vedic literature. The Puräëas (such

as the Brahma-vaivarta Puräëa, Näradéya Puräëa, Viñëu Puräëa and Bhägavata

Puräëa) are especially meant for Vaiñëavas and are also Vedic literature. As

such, whatever is stated within the Puräëas, Mahäbhärata and Rämäyaëa is

self-evident. There is no need for interpretation. The Bhagavad-gétä is also

within the Mahäbhärata; therefore all the statements of the Bhagavad-gétä

are self-evident. There is no need for interpretation, and if we do

interpret, the entire authority of the Vedic literature is lost.