dev Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 Hare Krishna prabhu, What will the position of Ramakrishna paramhans in God head . Many considered him a god himself. He was a great devotee of goddess Kali.His disciple Vivekanand was so famous even in West also. But he teaches that Only doing Hari naam is not going to help , just contradictory to Mahaparbhu. Hari Bol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 Ramakrishna paramhans is not a paramahamsa first of all he does not belong to any school or traditon if one does not shows to be a good student he cannot be a master even krsna, to sow the way, accepts a spiritual master so ramakrsna is not qualified even to open the mouth.. what to speak of discussing harinama hari, is not material, he has not dychotomy between image, substance and name the vigraha of hari is hari the name of hari is hari if hari is everything... harinama is everything ramakrsna is simply a little cheater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 Did not Lord Chaitanya have a material body? If so, how can He be considered to be the Supreme Personality of Godhead? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yasodanandana Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 real body, spiritual real body, not material. Personality means name, body, features, activities also for the Supreme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subala Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 who is ramakrishna? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 what does this have to do with ramakrishna ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 [image]http://www.cosmicharmony.com/Av/RamaKris/RamaKris.htm[/image] http://www.cosmicharmony.com/Av/RamaKris/RamaKris.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted July 15, 2003 Report Share Posted July 15, 2003 dev, Their teachings very from Mahaprabhu's in terms of goal also. I don't know much about any of them really. But Mahaprabhu's devotees see Him as the Supreme Person Krsna Himself, come to us in the mood of Radharani, tasting the mellow of Her love for Him. His servants and the servants of His servants want to find their place serving and facilitating this same mood in expression throughout eternity in their natural/original spiritual forms. They want to be awake to their own individuality and the Lord's individuality in order to accomplish this. All these pastimes take place in godhead and are not just fanciful imagnitive plays of the mind that eventual disolve into Brahman as we disolve in to them. I believe this is what Ramakrishna and vivekananda thought and taught. i could be wrong as i haven't read any of their works. Perhaps those that have would take the time to shed some light on how they differ, if they do, from Mahaprabhu on the nature of the Godhead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 The author of this post seems to be so steeped in ignorance ( and Lord knows what supreme arrogance goes along with it ), that I find it almost meaningless to even tell him/her what a foolish opinion he/she has posted. What is more surprising is that none of the regular registered members felt the need to correct a fellow devotee(?) gone totally astray. Why I write what I have written above can best be understood if any reader takes the trouble to read on Sri Ramakrishna. There are a number of books available. I would suggest the first time reader to take up "The life of Ramakrishna" by Romain Rolland. Going back to the question asked, the learned members of this list will know the condition that Lord Gauranga laid down for a person to take the sacred name of Hari. Lord Gauranga says: "Listen, Swaroopa and Ramananda! I tell you about the mental attitude with which the Name should be recited. "Hari's Name should always be chanted by him who must be humbler than a blade of grass (which is trodden upon); who is more patient, forbearing and charitable than a tree (which does not cry out even when it is cut down, and which does not beg for water even when scorched to death, but on the contrary, offers its treasure to whosoever seeks it, bears the sun and rain itself but protects those who take shelter under it from rain and sunshine); who, however worthy of esteem should, instead of claiming respect for himself, give respect to all (from a sense of God's immanency in all beings). He who thus takes Krishna's Name gets Krishna-prem". If you meet this requirement, then you will surely reach your goal by taking the holy name. The question is, do you meet the requirement? Sri Ramakrishna's saying should also be seen in this light. And I just wish to mention this for those not aware about the life of Sri Ramakrishna that though He was known as a devotee of Kali, He was a great devotee of Sri Krishna too(you might wonder how he got the name Ramakrishna). There are numerous instances where He got lost in samadhi through the mention of Krishna or any of his lilas or visiting a place associated with the memory of Sri Krishna. May the Lord give you wisdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 But it sounds as if his goal was merging into impersonal Brahman, is that correct. A devotee views absorbtion into impersonal Brahman as a type of hell and the idea has no attraction for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 === But it sounds as if his goal was merging into impersonal Brahman, is that correct. A devotee views absorbtion into impersonal Brahman as a type of hell and the idea has no attraction for him. === Not only His, but the thousands of years of Indian religious thought has pronounced that to be the very goal of all religion. The Lord Himself speaks about it in the Gita. As for finding something hellish or blissful, it is meaningful to speak in those terms, only when one has reached that stage. The state of Brahman is not a 'conception', such that one may find its 'very idea' to be blissful or hellish - it is the Truth or Reality. If a devotee is not seeking it, he will not find it - but at the same time he will have no reason to claim such a state does not exist or that such a state, to the exclusion of his Godhead is not the Reality. As for Sri Ramakrishna, the great devotee that he was, he prayed to the Divine mother saying "Let those who want Brhamajnana get Brahmajnana, may I always have your presence". I think it is he used to say, "Who wants to become sugar, people want to taste sugar". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Ramakrishna and Vivekananda were both nonvegetarians. In addition to this Vivekananda smoked and died of lung cancer. Vivekananda said it was better to plant egglpant then tulasi, because at least you will get some food. Vaishnavas on the other hand plant and worship tulasi as the means to attain bhakti. They were not vaishnavas, and are not considered saints by those who follow bhagavata-dharma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 You are obviously misinformed about the cause of Swami Vivekananda's death. So is vegetarianism the test of spirituality with the Vaishnavas? It seems rather easy to qualify for such a test. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Rather than barging in with the challenging attitude and putting others on the defense it would perhaps have been better to have said... "That's interesting JNdas but I heard that Swami Vivekananda's died from..... I am not sure I understand the qualifications of a Vaisnava. Can someone please explain it to me?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dev Posted July 16, 2003 Author Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 The whole thing is here http://www.hknet.org.nz/Drug-Alcohol-page.htm Srila A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada Room Conversation with Alcohol and Drug Hospital People Guest (1): Do they have to wear those clothes and shave their heads and chanting those things... Prabhupada: That is optional. That is also optional. That is not compulsory. But in India because the brahmacaris, sannyasis, they dress in a particular way, they do that. But that is not compulsory. But it has got a psychological effect, because whenever we go, people chant "Hare Krsna!" So by this dress, we give chance, the other men, to chant Hare Krsna. Guest (1): Well, could you correct me if I'm wrong. We have a society called Ramakrishna Society, a society in Burma. Those people who founded this society and are practicing Krsna culture, they don't wear those things, or they don't chant in their temple, but they do all sorts of social welfare type of thing. Is there any difference between... Prabhupada: Ramakrishna Mission is not Vedic. It is a creation of Vivekananda's concoction. It is not Vedic. Just like they created a God, Ramakrishna. So that is not a Vedic sanction, that you create any fool rascal, a god. Guest (1): Isn't yours a product of or derivative of Vedic? Prabhupada: Yes, completely. Guest (1): So how would you... Prabhupada: Just like whatever question you are asking, we are answering from Vedic literature. We are not answering ourself. That is the difference. The evidence is from the Vedic literature. I don't say that "In my opinion it is like this." We don't say. Guest (1): I'm sorry, I missed that point. Could you please explain? Paramahamsa: He said it is Vedic because the answers he is giving are not his opinion or concoction, but he is giving from the Vedic knowledge or the Vedic scriptures instead of making up his own opinion. That is the meaning of Vedic; it is based on the Vedic teachings exactly. Guest (1): But the Ramakrishna wasn't. Prabhupada: No. Guest (1): They formed their own way. Prabhupada: Yes. Guest (2): Do you consider that this kind of practice or the practicing this kind of culture is regimentated? A person has to come in and spend some times in the temple, and... Prabhupada: Yes, the association, the influence of association. If you go to a drunkard association, you become a drunkard. And if you go to a saintly association, you become a saint. Sangat sanjayate kamah. Find out. Paramahamsa: dhyayato visayan pumsah sangas tesupajayate sangat sanjayate kamah kamat krodho 'bhijayate Translation: "While contemplating the objects of the senses, a person develops attachment for them, and from such attachment lust develops, and from lust anger arises." Prabhupada: If one becomes lusty and if it is not fulfilled, he becomes angry. This is all psychological. Guest (2): Yeah, well, when a person is attached to that group in the temple, isn't this, become a lust too? You see, being influenced by the group and also attached to the people... Prabhupada: We are teaching to be influenced by Krsna. Therefore we have written fifty books like that, four hundred pages. You can show some of our books. Paramahamsa: This is Srimad-Bhagavatam, Volume Two, Volume Four... Prabhupada: Sixty volumes. Paramahamsa: Nectar of Devotion. Guest (4): You seem to be placing a lot of emphasis on books. Are you following any particular path of yoga, niyama-yoga...? Paramahamsa: She says we place a lot of emphasis on books, and she wonders if we are following a particular path such as dhyana-yoga or jnana-yoga or what? Prabhupada: Bhakti-yoga. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 it is not a test for a vaishnava, it is the sign that vivekananda is not even classified as human been...... but he's acting as a guru or swami (conqueror of the senses... with attachement to the meat) the point is hypochrisy, not eating meat... how can one be guru without detachment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Clearly the vaisnavas are attracted to something or someone who is beyond the Brahman effulgence. They speak of worlds of eternal variety and individuality where all are self aware. This present world that we call material seems to be just a perverted reflection of the activities there. The Brahman effulgence seems to be a radiance to be pierced and surpassed rather than merged into. Searching around I have found many quotes similar to this one below. Sakalam eva vihäya düräd caitanya-candra-caraëe kurutänurägam. You just try to submit yourself on the lotus feet of Lord Caitanya. By His mercy you’ll find that, kaivalyaà narakäyate, you’ll find that to become one with the Supreme, it will appear to you just like hell. To merge into the Supreme, that is the highest ambition of the impersonalists. But if you submit yourself to the lotus feet of Caitanyacandra, then you’ll find that this conception is just like hell. Kaivalyaà narakäyate. Naraka means hell. You’ll find kaivalyam, to become one.... [cut] ... By the grace of Lord Caitanya you’ll find to merge into the effulgence, to become one with the Supreme will be considered as hell, actually. If you ask any pure devotee, “Do you want to merge into the existence, impersonal Brahman?” he’ll deny. If he has got little Krsna consciousness, he’ll deny, that “What is this merging? This is hellish. We want to dance with Krsna. Why shall I merge and lose my existence, individuality?” SB Lect 1.5.8-9 As an aside--- Jndas if you have time and the facilities are satisfactory maybe you could tell us about some of the things that you are doing in Orissa. You mentioned working on building two new temples. How is that going? Hare Krsna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 To say that Ramakrishna paramahamsa is not a paramahamsa is idiotic. He is a great devotee, his teachings are wonderful and he is self realized. The same thing goes to Vivekananda who was self realized after giving up all materialism and material activities. Please don't say that they lack any spirituality just because they ate meat, then that would mean that my role model: Jesus had no spirituality just because he ate meat. So did Moses... he ate meat, so he was unfit to see god? /images/graemlins/confused.gif that would be ridiculous Not eating meat is good, because it is a sign for our devotion to krishna. Meat eating is considered as a tamasic activity because first you kill an animal very cruelly and eat it later . It is a task of an asura, but even asuras are loved by krishna. Narasimha loved Hiranyaskhapu, why? because he was thinking of hari day and night even in his sleep (vira bhakthi) . Anyway, the point is this, we vaishnavas like to be the servants of the supreme and we would like to make the supreme happy. What Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Vivekananda were doing is trying to get out of this mire of material existence and realize that there is a supreme and the supreme is the cause of everything. What we are trying to do is get an easy pass to bliss by bhakthi and through the service to that supreme because we know that the supreme already exists. What they tried to do was realize the supreme with their intelligent (yet human so mundane) brains. It is possible to realize the supreme with our brains as told by krishna in bhagavath Gita, but it is quite hard and almost impossible for a seeker such as myself. Well thats what I think they did, and also the teachings of Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Vivekananda do not contradict with teachings of Chaitanya, even though they appear to contradict one another in the eyes of an unintelligent seeker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 i_l_k, They taught different goals than did Caitanya. That is the point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subala Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 guest: What you think about Ramakrishna Prabhupada: Rama who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Govindaram Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Hare Krishna In the Hanuman Chalisa by Tulasidasji, there are quotes from Ramakrishna so I guess he must be a devotee of mahavir. Please forgive me all for the dumb 'smile' simile, can't get rid of it...Admin please Help! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 I know you are probably older than me and know better... but you are as guilty of speculating on a higher being (prabhupada) as I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 he is not speculating; he is quoting. I know you are probably older than me and know better... but you are as guilty of speculating on a higher being (prabhupada) as I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_love_krishna_ Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 i_l_k, They taught different goals than did Caitanya. That is the point. ********************************************************** I have read 2 books given to us by Srila Prabhupada, the first is called "Bhagavath gita" with all its purports. The second is "Science of Self Realization" I also read a book called "The Path of Yoga" but that does not really count because it is an online book at www.krishna.org and I don't know if it is really written by prabhupada. Also, I three books by Swami Chinmayananda : 1. Self-Unfoldment 2. Kindle Life 3. Art of Man Making( which is bhagavath Gita and purports explaining each verse) The reason I am telling you this is because, After reading these books I don't see much difference in the teachings of prabhupada and chinmayananda. As said in the bhagavath Gita... Knowledge and devotion are not different from each other. In the same way, the admirer of Adi shankaracharya and Vivekananda who is Swami Chinmayananda and the follower of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Tukarama come to the same conclusions even though they use different terminology. This is no speculation ,but simple truth which I have discovered through a little analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted July 16, 2003 Report Share Posted July 16, 2003 Well it may indeed sound like that at first since some impersonalists choose to mimic the phraseology and sentiments of realized vaisnava's, but their goals are not the same at all. The realized vaisnava isn't worshiping and loving God while holding obliteration into the impersonal Brahman effulgence as his true motive. Once the Lord grants the impersonalist desire the yogi comes to think of himself as the only One. To a vaisnava this is worse than just incomplete realization, it is a horror show. The realized vaisnava doesn't care a fig about salvation. Only we the imprisioned have that concern. His concern is the pleasure of Krsna which he is prepared to secure in heaven or hell, doesn't matter. Ask yourself this. If they are saying the same then why do the leaders of their top schools debate the conclusions of the other? They agree they disagree. Why not you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.