Hinduism and other Faiths

who the fuck tries to bend themselves like a pretzel to get to a higher planet?

 

You should research into jnana yoga and raja yoga sincerely first before talking about it.

 

sorry.

i was talking about hatha yoga. to be honest, i've only read two books on it, and don't know much about the other kinds of yoga, so i probably shouldn't talk about them. you're right. but the point is that bhakti yoga isn't better, or other forms of yoga are wrong. it's just the easiest and most effective, in my opinion.

&ChiefCowpie, i don't know what you've been exposed to, what you know, so, i can't really answer that question... i mean, i could, but i don't feel like writing that much right now .

 

I absolutely agree Jedi. I was merely stating the advaitin viewpoint to lend a balance to the thread.

Prism, I am not interested in trying to prove anyone right or wrong. Spiritual truth cannot be reached by logic alone, otherwise every university would offer degrees in enlightenment. In the end all scriptures say the truth, God, the self, is beyond words. Let us be content to experience it.

Why not jnana yoga or karma yoga from an elightened master? These differences of paths are for beginners. After while they merge - That which you love you seek knowledge of, that which you love you work towards, and that which you work towards and know you develop love for.
While prabhupada said so much about aaccepting a true teacher and scriptures, he has often spoken most disrespectfully of undisputed masters like Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, and even I, with my average of sanskrit, have found places where he has blatantly mistranslated Gita to prove his point. So while what he says of trust and faith is wonderful, I have reservations about him as being trustworthy. A child of a prostitute would have ample reason to doubt the mother's statement of who the father is.

I am not trying to discredit anyone, or to argue against you. I myself find great joy in katha and regularly study the ramayana and bhagavatam and even teach classes on them. I only disapprove when I hear disrespect to other paths or the claim that one is superior to the other.

In a scripture on bhakti, devotion is stressed as the easest and best path. In a text on jnana yoga that is indicated as the highest. Either all scriptures are wrong, or they are indicating the same thing. One calls it bhakti, the other jnana, and the third calls it karma.
In the end, all paths are one.. It is only to suit the variety of students and personalities that there is such diversity.

 

Also, I find the translation of the sanskrit word 'loka' to 'planet' most problematic and misleading. Loka simply means field of experience. And right here on earth there are infinite fields of experience. The world of the doctor, the world of the beggar, the world of the ant, the world of the tree, etc. etc. etc. That is what loka means. It is not some kind of spiritual spacewalk.

 

okay, i'm really sorry if i made it seem like we were in a debate .

i want to say now that i'm really sorry if i came off as pompous. it's a bad habit to act like i know more than i know; i'm really a beginner and i don't know very much. so if i say something wrong, please help me, because i do really want to know. i'm sorry if i sounded like i wanted to prove myself.

i'm also sorry if i made it seem like i think bhakti is the only way to enlightenment or liberation. the truth is it works for me, and is such a part of me that i can't fathom taking any other path. it's true that they all merge. it really is all the same thing.

if your mother was a prostitute, you could doubt her when she tells you who your father is... that's true. but still you'd have to go to her and have some level of trust in her to find the truth. there are so many variables. we all just do the best we can, find what works for us, constantly strive to be better than we were yesterday... hope we don't make any crucial mistakes... but we are still of this world; the best we can do is to surrender to god however we can, however we feel is best. surrender, in any form, is the most important thing.

i'd like to see where prabhupada is disrespectful or where he mistranslates the gita. i believe you, but i'd like to see. i know he wasn't perfect, but i have a hard time believing he could consciously do something mean or misleading.



the different lokas also have me confused. prabhupada has said something like... if you could travel at the speed of thought for a million years you still would not reach the spiritual sky. so, does he mean that it is physically infinitely far away, actually existing in a sky the way we can percieve the earth is existing in a sky, but completely spiritual and eternal? or does he mean it is something like an alternate dimension that could be existing right on top of this one, completely unreachable to us? or something else? i'm confused, because krishnaloka is described like a physical planet, with the desire trees and touchstone houses and activities like krishna and balarama's in vrindavan on earth...

 

we are all beginners here, and I don't think that "pompous show offy" thing ever happened, let go of your inhibitions, you don't have to feel ashamed or guilty about saying anything, this is a free speech forum after all .

Yea , its the same for me too. I just can't live without krishna.

Yes, that is true, surrender to God is the only way to know Him.

Guru sayings might be sometimes offensive to some and not so offensive to others. The reason behind it is the difference in the context from which we look at his teachings. If he says "mayavadi bastard", one might perceive him as a grandfather figure who is trying to correct his misled grandsons , but another person might think that he is narrowminded.

No no its not hard to understand. You see , Krishna is everywhere. How? - well he is vishnu, so he is everywhere. Whereever Krishna is, there is vrindavan with all of his devotees. So they are actually everywhere with Krishna. Even right now with you. Krishna shows all of this, called the vishwa rupa to Arjuna by giving him divine eyes. Once we progress in bhakti Yoga and gain enlightenment- we will be able to see how this is all possible.

 

i'm not sure what your familiarity or knowledge is of avataras but i am an avatara

 

lol ego or ahankara taken to the extreme level

 

From an interview in NZ from 1975:

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.


(This shows not only great disprespect to one of Hinduism's most universally accepted saint, it also shows total and complete ignorance of Ramakrishna mission. Also a bit hypocritical when you see ISKCON building temples to Prabhupada.)

Even worse"
Sometimes he--I have heard all this--he will observe the menstrual period. (laughter) To laugh or lament? "He's in menstrual period." This Ramakrishna did. He was also, because Jagamati experimented.

Hari-sauri: Oh, he became a woman sometimes.

Prabhupada: Yes, sometimes. And there was menstrual, menstruation period. He became so perfect, there was menstruation. (laughter) This rascal Ramakrishna did it. And he was going to make experiment of the Muhammadan realization by eating...

Hari-sauri: Meat.

Prabhupada: ...go-mamsa, cow's flesh.

Hari-sauri: I think you said that he...

Prabhupada: Yes.

Hari-sauri: ...was refused entry into some temple because of that.

Prabhupada: Yes. He was such a rascal. He was actually impotent, and he could not have sex with his wife, and he addressed, "Oh, you are my mother." And these rascals took: "Oh, he is so advanced that he could see his wife as mother. Oh, self-realized. By worshiping Kali he has become so perfect, he sees everyone as mother." Such a rascal he was, and he is God. These things are going on. But I am speaking not my manufacture. I heard it from my Guru Maharaja. He told me that these are these, like that. Not unauthorized. I don't speak anything which I have not heard from my Guru Maharaja."

(Again anyone even fleeting connected with RK mission would know that this is totally false.)

 

doesn't sound like i am going to be your ishta devata... not that my wife would of approved... she likes to worship me all to her self

 

This is the kernel of the problem -

Better if people would think for themselves, and take responsibility for informing themselves.

Otherwise you end up with 'authorized' lies.

 

It is not the same metaphor at all, because here it is used very differently. There the intent was to point out that we casn never be fully one with God. Here Sri RK is only saying that divine energy is evrywhere, like sunlight, it is nondiscriminating and allpervading. And note very carefully he tells us to follow this to the source and awaken to nondual reality - which means transcend distinction of jivatma and paramatma and become one with the supreme.

 

Q, How is the ego to be destroyed?

A, Hold the ego first and then ask how it is to be destroyed. Who asks the question? It is the ego. This question is a sure way to cherish the ego and not to kill it. If you seek the ego you will find that it does not exist. That is the way to destory it.

 

see, i don't want to do that, though. i'd rather serve as a seperate entity than merge.

whatever you want, krishna will give you, according to your karma that YOU shape...

 

That is the beauty of the Gita verse:

ye yatha maam prapadyante taamstathaiva bhajaamyaham

In any way people worship I will reward them in that way.
I love the verse from Adhyatma Ramayana where Sri Hanuman tells Rama:

From the standpoint of the body I am your servant, from the standpoint of the individual self I am a small part of you, while from the absolute standpoint, I am you alone.

 

There is oneness in seperation and seperation in oneness.

 

Hooray!

 

Ah, how pretty it is when we all agree.

 

It still implies a difference between the sun disc and the sun's rays. That's what I was getting at.