PDA

View Full Version : Call to Vaishnavas-Human life is not made for pleasure!!!!



orlando
08 May 2006, 03:58 AM
Namaste all.
I am really surprised to read what Shri Satay,who recognize him-self as a vaishnava,wrote:
Anyway, isn't there some mention of a liquid called 'Soma' somewhere in our scriptures? What the heck is 'soma'? Why devas drink this 'soma'? Why indra is talked about having dancing girls around in swarga?

So devas can have girls, pleasure, sex drink soma but mere mortals can not eh? What the heck kind of logic is that?

Hypocrisy as usual...


Dear Satay,please note that the human life form has to be used for spiritual realization in order to obtain Moksha.Devas are made for a life of pleasure.
Please read Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 7,Chapter 6.By http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto7/chapter6.html
(1) S'rÓ Prahl‚da said: 'From one's childhood on should a person of intelligence practice the dharma of devotional service unto the Lord [as described in 7.5.23-24]; to be born in this human life is a temporary thing rarely achieved that is suffused with meaning. (2) That way [of meaning] indeed is of a living being here the approaching of the feet of Vishnu because this concerns the dearest and best one of all alive, the Master of the Soul [see also 3.25.38 and B.G. 5.29,]. (3) By divine ordinance is happiness to the sensual, o daitya's, everywhere available to all entities united with a material body, just as there is the unhappiness without one asking for it. (4) For that there is no need to endeavor, one would only waste one's life, and there is no need either to lust about it; the ultimate goal of life are the lotus feet of Mukunda [the Lord of Liberation]. (5) Therefore should a person of reflection as long as he [from old age] is not of failure, still being stout and strong, be after the real benefit of [Mukunda in] having a material life in a human body. (6) Of the hundred years that every person has for his life is a person in service of his senses indeed wasting half of his time as one sleeps half the day in ignorance being engulfed in darkness. (7) In one's childhood one is naive, as a boy one is playing and thus twenty years do pass and another twenty years pass being unable when one physically is incapacitated of old age. (8) And bewildered by formidable material lusts that can never be satisfied is the one overly attached to family matters madly wasting the remainder of his life. (9) What man attached to his household who, with hands and feet bound by the ropes of affection, is out of control with his senses, is able to free himself [see 1.2: 6-7]? (10) Who, indeed thinking that to make money is more desirable than to live [in devotion and gratitude], would be able to give up that acquisition for which merchant, thief and public servant risk their dear lives? (11-13) How can one give up on associating privately with one's loving wife so pleasing, not support with wisdom the family bound by their affection or what person would not be attracted to the prattle of children? With one's sons and married daughters, brothers, sisters and depending parents enshrined in one's heart, with all the household matters of very nice furniture, a good income and all the pets and the groups of servants and maidservants connected with the family, how can one give up; like a silkworm is one greedily occupied with all kinds of activities in desires that can never be satisfied considering the genitals and tongue the most important; how can such a massive illusion be forsaken? (14) Not for his lifetime does he understand to desist from the maintenance of his family; maddened spoiling the true purpose, at all fronts being distressed the threefold way [see 2.10: 8], has he no regrets about simply enjoying the family. (15) With a mind set on wealth and known with the fault of cheating out here for the money he nevertheless after having died is tied to this material world [by Yamar‚ja taking rebirth again] as he, too fond of his kin, never in peace with his desires, was out stealing in having no control over his senses. (16) Although knowing about it, o sons of Danu, is one busy with providing the greater family indeed not capable of understanding one's true self in entering the darkness of just like animals being estranged in a mine and thine conception of life. (17-18) Because never, anyone, wherever or whenever with a poor fund of knowledge will get any better in the art of liberating himself from looking after the lust being a sexual plaything and from being someone from whose bondage families expand, must you, my daitya friends in this keep yourselves far away from hiding with the demon that is too addicted to sensual pleasure; instead one should approach Lord N‚r‚yana, the original godhead, who by the association of the liberated lays out the desired path of liberation. (19) It is truly no great endeavor to satisfy the Infallible One, o asura sons, because in this world of all beings so close to the soul each and every respect is already established.

I am a brahmachary.
Please read what Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 7,Chapter 12 says about Brahmacharys.
(7) He, not belonging to the householders life, must, to the as good as invincible senses that even take away the mind of a renunciate, give it up to address women with the observance of the great vow of celibacy [the yama of ashth‚nga-yoga]. (8) To brush the hair, massage the body, to bathe and rub it in with oil is something that the still young wife of the guru should never be allowed to do as a service if the adept is still young [see also 1.11:29]. (9) Especially the bewildered worship [of her] is like fire to the pot of butter that a man is; with other women, even with his own daughter, should he, living in seclusion, not associate more than is needed. (10)

orlando
08 May 2006, 04:13 AM
Now please read what Lord Krishna says to Uddhava in Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 11,Chapter 14:
(29) Giving up being intimate with women [to have sex with them, with others or otherwise] and keeping far from the company of womanizers should one, mastering the self, sit at ease in seclusion and with great care concentrate on Me.(30) No other attachment gives a man as much suffering and bondage like the attachment to women and the association of those attached to women.

Now Chapter 17:
(33) With [sexually receptive] women, or sex-minded living beings, glancing, touching, conversing and joking and such is the first thing that someone not keeping a household [the sanny‚sÓ, the v‚naprastha and the brahmac‚rÓ] should forsake [see 11.14: 29 and 6.1: 56-68].

Now read what Manu writes in Manu Smrti.I use the translation at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu02.htm
213. It is the nature of women to seduce men in this (world); for that reason the wise are never unguarded in (the company of) females.
214. For women are able to lead astray in (this) world not only a fool, but even a learned man, and (to make) him a slave of desire and anger.
215. One should not sit in a lonely place with one's mother, sister, or daughter; for the senses are powerful, and master even a learned man.


Regards,
Orlando.

satay
08 May 2006, 08:54 AM
Dear Orlando,
Now that you dumped all this stuff on me...it suddenly makes sense...;)

satay
08 May 2006, 08:59 AM
Now please read what Lord Krishna says to Uddhava in Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 11,Chapter 14:
(29) Giving up being intimate with women [to have sex with them, with others or otherwise] and keeping far from the company of womanizers should one, mastering the self, sit at ease in seclusion and with great care concentrate on Me.(30) No other attachment gives a man as much suffering and bondage like the attachment to women and the association of those attached to women.

Now Chapter 17:
(33) With [sexually receptive] women, or sex-minded living beings, glancing, touching, conversing and joking and such is the first thing that someone not keeping a household [the sanny‚sÓ, the v‚naprastha and the brahmac‚rÓ] should forsake [see 11.14: 29 and 6.1: 56-68].

Now read what Manu writes in Manu Smrti.I use the translation at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu02.htm
213. It is the nature of women to seduce men in this (world); for that reason the wise are never unguarded in (the company of) females.
214. For women are able to lead astray in (this) world not only a fool, but even a learned man, and (to make) him a slave of desire and anger.
215. One should not sit in a lonely place with one's mother, sister, or daughter; for the senses are powerful, and master even a learned man.


Regards,
Orlando.

Dear Orlando,
Are you sure that Bhagwan said that about Women? Wouldn't it just make sense to not make women at all if they cauase so much trouble to men?

This sounds like written by some over zealous men and not by Bhagwan himself.

satay
08 May 2006, 09:01 AM
By the way, no where in your dump it says anything about why devas can have all this pleasure and not men.

Why are devas made for pleasure?

orlando
08 May 2006, 11:01 AM
Namaste.
Dear Satay you told me:
Dear Orlando,
Are you sure that Bhagwan said that about Women? Wouldn't it just make sense to not make women at all if they cauase so much trouble to men?

This sounds like written by some over zealous men and not by Bhagwan himself.


I am sure that Shri Bhagavan said that.Please browse http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org and read the verses.

The followings are the two verses 29 and 30 of Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 11,Chapter 14 in the original (sanskrit) language:
29.strīṇāḿ strī-sańgināḿ sańgaḿ
tyaktvā dūrata ātmavān
kṣeme vivikta āsīnaś
cintayen mām atandritaḥ
30.na tathāsya bhavet kleśo
bandhaś cānya-prasańgataḥ
yoṣit-sańgād yathā puḿso
yathā tat-sańgi-sańgataḥ

Now please read the ISKCON translation.
By http://www.srimadbhagavatam.com/11/14/29/en
Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 11.14.29

strīṇāḿ strī-sańgināḿ sańgaḿ

tyaktvā dūrata ātmavān

kṣeme vivikta āsīnaś

cintayen mām atandritaḥ

SYNONYMS

strīṇām — of women; strī — to women; sańginām — of those who are attached or intimately associated; sańgam — association; tyaktvā — giving up; dūrataḥ — far away; ātma-vān — being conscious of the self; kṣeme — fearless; vivikte — in a separated or isolated place; āsīnaḥ — sitting; cintayet — one should concentrate; mām — on Me; atandritaḥ — with great care.

TRANSLATION

Being conscious of the eternal self, one should give up association with women and those intimately associated with women. Sitting fearlessly in a solitary place, one should concentrate the mind on Me with great attention.


By http://www.srimadbhagavatam.com/11/14/30/en
Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 11.14.30

na tathāsya bhavet kleśo

bandhaś cānya-prasańgataḥ

yoṣit-sańgād yathā puḿso

yathā tat-sańgi-sańgataḥ

SYNONYMS

na — not; tathā — like that; asya — of him; bhavet — could be; kleśaḥ — suffering; bandhaḥ — bondage; ca — and; anya-prasańgataḥ — from any other attachment; yoṣit — of women; sańgāt — from attachment; yathā — just as; puḿsaḥ — of a man; yathā — similarly; tat — to women; sańgi — of those attached; sańgataḥ — from the association.

TRANSLATION

Of all kinds of suffering and bondage arising from various attachments, none is greater than the suffering and bondage arising from attachment to women and intimate contact with those attached to women.

orlando
08 May 2006, 11:10 AM
However,in the third chapter of Manu Smrti,Manu says:
55. Women must be honoured and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law, who desire (their own) welfare.

56. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards.
57. Where the female relations live in grief, the family soon wholly perishes; but that family where they are not unhappy ever prospers.

58. The houses on which female relations, not being duly honoured, pronounce a curse, perish completely, as if destroyed by magic.

59. Hence men who seek (their own) welfare, should always honour women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes, and (dainty) food.

60. In that family, where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, happiness will assuredly be lasting.

satay
08 May 2006, 11:53 AM
What did Bhagwan "do" when he was here 5000 years ago.

Did he follow these principles you outlined?
Did he shun women? Did he have no contact with women?

orlando
08 May 2006, 01:17 PM
Namaste.
Please note that Lord Krishna is God Him-self.He doesn't need to follow these rules.The Master can break His own rules but not the disciple.
I hope you already know about Rasa-dance.
Please read Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 10,chapter 33:
(27-28) S'rÓ ParÓkchit said: 'To establish the dharma and to subdue the ones defiant, descended indeed He, the Supreme Lord, the Controller of the Universe with His plenary portion [Balar‚ma]; how could He, the original speaker, executor and protector of the codes of moral conduct, behave to the contrary o brahmin, touching the wives of others? (29) What did He, so self-satisfied, have in mind with this assuredly contemptible performance, o best of the vowed, please dispel our doubt about this.'

(30) S'rÓ S'uka said: 'The transgression of dharma and thoughtlessness, as can be seen with controllers of spiritual potency, does not, as with an all-consuming fire [staying the same], mean they are at fault. (31) Someone not in control sure mustn't even think of ever doing a thing like this; such a one, acting out of foolishness, would be destroyed like one not being Rudra would be with [drinking] the poison from the ocean [see 8.7]. (32) True are the words of the ones in control [with the Lord, with themselves] and what they do should by people of intelligence [only] sometimes be performed, doing of them that which is in accord with what they said [see also B.G. e.g. 3: 6-7, 3:42, 5:7]. (33) For them does by their pious activity [religious excercises] the benefit for themselves not accrue nor will there for those free from false ego [acting] to the opposite be the undesirable reactions, my best. (34) How then can we in connection with the Controller of those who are controlled - all the created beings, animals, human beings and denizens of heaven - speak of right or wrong? (35) The sages, whose bondage of karma by serving the dust of the lotusfeet has all been washed away, are satisfied by the power of yoga and act freely, they, of Him, never get entangled; were indeed would the bondage be of them who to His will have accepted bodies transcendental? [see vapu]. (36) He who within the gopÓs and their husbands, indeed within all embodied beings, lives as the Supreme Witness, has assumed His form to sport in this world. (37) Assuming a humanlike body to show His mercy to His devotees, does He accept such pastimes of which one hearing about becomes dedicated to Him.


Please note that we have just follow the rules of the scriptures.But we must NOT try to imitate Lord Krishna's past-times.


This material universe is God's playground.He can do what He wants.But we human beings have to follow the shastric rules.
Regards,
Orlando.

satay
08 May 2006, 02:11 PM
right...I forgot that we are just "puppets" :)

satay
08 May 2006, 02:15 PM
also Orlando,
can you tell me where you found the "devas are meant for to have pleasure" . just curious.

orlando
08 May 2006, 03:12 PM
Namaste.
Satay,I don't think that in the scriptures you will find the exact words "devas are meant for to have pleasure" but this is obvious by reading the scriptures.
Only in the human life form you may obtain moksha.A soul who takes birth in Swarga-loka as deva goes there to enjoy the results of his good karma.
In Swarga-loka there are the very beatiful girls called Apsaras.I did read in a "summary version" of Ramayana that they are so beatiful that some devas ejaculated just by looking at the apsaras!!
A person who goes to Yama-loka goes there to suffer his bad karma.
An human life used for pleasure is a wasted life!
Please read again the words of Shri Prahlada Maharaja that I posted earlier.

About the "puppets",this is a just an example to show that we jivas (souls) are under the control of God.
Please read what Lord Vishnu tells Durvasa at Srimad Bhagavata Purana,canto 9,Chapter 4:
(63) The Supreme Lord said: 'Precisely o twice-born one, I am not self-willed, I indeed am fully committed to My bhaktas; it is because they are devotees that My heart is controlled by the saintly and by those that hold those bhaktas dear. (64) I as their ultimate destination am, without My saintly devotees, not for the blissful essence or the Supreme of My opulences.65) Their wife, house, children, relatives, their very lives and wealth - if they unto Me for the Transcendence gave up on all these taking their shelter, then how can I be after those things and give up on them? (66) The way a chaste woman does with a gentle husband, do the saintly, pure and equalminded,in their hearts firmly attached to Me, in settling for their devotional service, have Me under control. (67) In My service do they automatically achieve the four types of liberation and do they hanker, simply serving, not for the complete so that there is no question of other things: in the course of time have they been overcome. (68) The saintly are always in My heart and I am verily always in theirs; they know nothing apart from Me and and I do not have the least interest apart from them.

Regards,
Orlando.

satay
08 May 2006, 03:21 PM
Namaste.
Satay,I don't think that in the scriptures you will find the exact words "devas are meant for to have pleasure" but this is obvious by reading the scriptures.


is it obvious? really? I thought you were making a claim that it is written in the scripture that devas are meant to have pleasure but you are just saying that by 'reading scripture' and making observation on it, is it?



Only in the human life form you may obtain moksha.A soul who takes birth in Swarga-loka as deva goes there to enjoy the results of his good karma.
In Swarga-loka there are the very beatiful girls called Apsaras.Orlando.

so what you are saying is that this life is misery and we should not enjoy anything in this life for a promise of 'more enjoyment' in the swarga loka. is that what you are saying 'postpone enjoyment' and by doing so we go to swarga loka so we can really have enjoyment?

orlando
08 May 2006, 03:38 PM
is it obvious? really? I thought you were making a claim that it is written in the scripture that devas are meant to have pleasure but you are just saying that by 'reading scripture' and making observation on it, is it?



so what you are saying is that this life is misery and we should not enjoy anything in this life for a promise of 'more enjoyment' in the swarga loka. is that what you are saying 'postpone enjoyment' and by doing so we go to swarga loka so we can really have enjoyment?

To read your reply gave me a good laugh!:D

I am saying that we should live a spiritual life devoted to God.This must be done in order to obtain Moksha and go to Vaikuntha,the spiritual abode of Lord Vishnu, and not to Swarga-loka.A soul in Swarga-loka one day will take birth again as an huma being.
Sense gratification and devotion to God are not very compatible.
The biggest enjoyment and bliss is found at Vaikuntha.
Sexual pleasure is the biggest form of enjoyment in the material worlds and it is also the biggest form of bondage because it binds us in the material words.
Please read the words of Swami Prabhupada,the founder of ISKCON:
In the material world, pleasure is ultimately manifested in the sex attraction between man and woman. The man lives simply to be attracted by women, and the woman lives simply to be attracted by men. That is the basic principle of material life. As soon as these attractions are combined, people become more and more implicated in material existence. In order to show them special favor, Krsna exhibited this rasa-lila dance. It is just to captivate the conditioned soul. Since they are very much attracted by sexology, they can enjoy the same life with Krsna and thus become liberated from the material condition.

Regards,
Orlando.

satay
08 May 2006, 03:43 PM
I am saying that we should live a spiritual life devoted to God.

I agree.


This must be done in order to obtain Moksha and go to Vaikuntha,the spiritual abode of Lord Vishnu, and not to Swarga-loka.

dear orlando, can you tell me what you will do in Vaikuntha and for how long?



The biggest enjoyment and bliss is found at Vaikuntha.

okay.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
08 May 2006, 03:52 PM
TRANSLATION

Being conscious of the eternal self, one should give up association with women and those intimately associated with women. Sitting fearlessly in a solitary place, one should concentrate the mind on Me with great attention.

TRANSLATION

Of all kinds of suffering and bondage arising from various attachments, none is greater than the suffering and bondage arising from attachment to women and intimate contact with those attached to women.


I am really starting to become more and more skeptical here. I've always believed that Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) is more of a way of life and less of a dogmatic religion. Obviously, any belief system has to have some foundation of rules. The problem with Hinduism today is that many Hindus just like a lot of Christians and Muslims love to toss around scripture here and there to back up their points when they don't even have the surrounding context and most don't even know the original language. Few Hindus today know Sanskrit and only a small portion of our shrutis and smritis are easily available and what is available is typically spun with some degree of bias from the guru who translated it.

I am not denying the scriptures but I am trying to figure out what exactly to believe because there are too many quotes from the scriptures that either don't make sense or contradict what is said in other parts of the same scripture or other scriptures. This leads me to believe that time has had a negative effect on Hinduism. What once was focused on a personal journey into the soul is now replaced by endless dogma and empty rituals.

Why did I bring this seemingly irrelevant banter here? I brought this up because I am seeing quoted material here that I simply don't agree with and simply does not make sense. It makes me wonder if the translator translated incorrectly, if it was changed over time, if it was simply a later addition to older scriptures, or if the translation is irrelevant due to the surrounding context. Hindus often rarely quote scripture by including the surrounding context so it is difficult to know whether the point being made is actually a different one than is presented.

Back to the point, quote number one said "Being conscious of the eternal self, one should give up association with women and those intimately associated with women. Sitting fearlessly in a solitary place, one should concentrate the mind on Me with great attention." This tells me nothing as I don't have the surrounding context. Second, if one is "conscious of the eternal self" why should he give up association with 50% of the human population? Third, it is referring only to men here as if men are the only ones persuing a spiritual path. Fourth, it destroys any concept of a householder lifestyle. The last part of the quote makes sense but a person cannot sit in meditation forever. They have to eat a meal, pay the bills, and take care of other responsibilities. Thus they will have to "associate" with the opposite sex at some point. Even a yogi in a cave has responsibilities. Fifth, there is no logic behind why someone "being conscious of the eternal self" should not associate with women. Does this mean that women cannot associate with other women? The translation actually sounds sexist.

The second quote, "Of all kinds of suffering and bondage arising from various attachments, none is greater than the suffering and bondage arising from attachment to women and intimate contact with those attached to women" is not scientifically correct. Alcohol and drug addiction are far more destructive than attachment to women as any one with common sense would agree. Again, this quote has a sexist tone to it. It assumes that all the readers are men and that all readers are heterosexual. It says nothing about female attachment to men.

My conscience tells me that after reading these translations, the Bhagavata Purana has been doctored somewhere along the lines. Just because Hinduism is about walking a spiritual path doesn't mean we should not give things a "reality check." ~BYS~

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
08 May 2006, 04:10 PM
I believe that when pursuing a spiritual path, controlling the senses will generally be more beneficial than evading the senses. It makes more sense to me to live a life of moderation--balancing the spiritual and material side of existence--while trying to raise one's consciousness done by using the senses but learning how to control the senses instead of allowing the senses to control you. It makes less sense to repress the senses to focus on God. Often you end up focusing more on repressing the senses than simply on raising one's awareness. The same people trying to be virgins for life consistently condemn sex as anti-spiritual for everyone else. The same people saying they won't touch a drop of alcohol condemn drinking as an evil for everyone else. Not surprisingly, the people that have sex and alcohol in moderation end up more spiritual than the ones trying to tell everyone else what not to do. After all, in order to escape mundane material existence, you have to first find out what mundane material existence is like. ~BYS~

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
08 May 2006, 04:18 PM
Please read the words of Swami Prabhupada,the founder of ISKCON:
In the material world, pleasure is ultimately manifested in the sex attraction between man and woman. The man lives simply to be attracted by women, and the woman lives simply to be attracted by men. That is the basic principle of material life. As soon as these attractions are combined, people become more and more implicated in material existence. In order to show them special favor, Krsna exhibited this rasa-lila dance. It is just to captivate the conditioned soul. Since they are very much attracted by sexology, they can enjoy the same life with Krsna and thus become liberated from the material condition.


As usual, quotes like these don't make sense. A lot of people are heavily trapped in material existence but I have yet to discover someone that lives for the sole purpose of attracting the opposite sex as described here. Additionally, not everyone is a sex addict. Many people aren't even that interested in sexual relationships to begin with and prefer other types of material enjoyment instead. I don't believe sexology is the proper term to use either as it means "study of sex." I am also sure that homosexuals would disagree as they find little to no interest in the opposite sex. I think that if Hindus want to sincerely pursue a spiritual path, they need to focus more on what they are for and less on what they are against. Just a thought. ~BYS~

orlando
08 May 2006, 04:26 PM
dear orlando, can you tell me what you will do in Vaikuntha and for how long?


Well,in Vaikuntha I will eternally enjoy eternal bliss in company of Lord Vishnu,Sri Maha-Lakshmi,Garuda,Ananta ecc and all the other mukta.

orlando
08 May 2006, 04:35 PM
The problem with Hinduism today is that many Hindus just like a lot of Christians and Muslims love to toss around scripture here and there to back up their points when they don't even have the surrounding context and most don't even know the original language.
...............
It makes me wonder if the translator translated incorrectly, if it was changed over time, if it was simply a later addition to older scriptures, or if the translation is irrelevant due to the surrounding context. Hindus often rarely quote scripture by including the surrounding context so it is difficult to know whether the point being made is actually a different one than is presented.
" ~BYS~

About the context the two verses (29 and 30) are taken from Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 11,Chapter 14.You can read the whole Chapter 14 at http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto11/chapter14.html

However the verses you quoted are taken from ISKCON translation.You may read it at http://www.srimadbhagavatam.com/11/14/en

Regards,
Orlando.

satay
08 May 2006, 05:30 PM
Well,in Vaikuntha I will eternally enjoy eternal bliss in company of Lord Vishnu,Sri Maha-Lakshmi,Garuda,Ananta ecc and all the other mukta.

What do you mean by eternal bliss? Are you going to sing, pray or what with Lord Vishnu? and for how long? Do you know how long is "eternity"?

Let's say you sat there and prayed to Lord Vishnu for the first 100 trillion years then what? Sing for another 100 trillion years, then what? dance with other muktas for another 100 trillion years? then? what else? go bungey jumping for another 100 trillion...play some video games perhaps? but then what??? eventually you are going to get bored out of your mind....isn't it?

ps: I have had a similar conversation with many fundamental christians on CF and I can very nicely plug 'god', 'jesus' and heave in your answers and it will sound like a christian talking. Are you sure you are hindu orlando and not a christian hiding in a vaishnava skin? I am sorry if this offends you but I am against christian nonsense like this so it is fair that I give you guys the same treatment when fellow vaishnavas start talking nonsense.

Hinduism is not a dogma...since when are hindus scripture quoters and parrots that just vomit out some shlokas without understanding the context and without having any respect for other sects. Please try to understand the beauty of Dharma and not degrade it by just parroting some texts.

orlando
08 May 2006, 06:02 PM
What do you mean by eternal bliss? Are you going to sing, pray or what with Lord Vishnu? and for how long? Do you know how long is "eternity"?

Let's say you sat there and prayed to Lord Vishnu for the first 100 trillion years then what? Sing for another 100 trillion years, then what? dance with other muktas for another 100 trillion years? then? what else? go bungey jumping for another 100 trillion...play some video games perhaps? but then what??? eventually you are going to get bored out of your mind....isn't it?

ps: I have had a similar conversation with many fundamental christians on CF and I can very nicely plug 'god', 'jesus' and heave in your answers and it will sound like a christian talking. Are you sure you are hindu orlando and not a christian hiding in a vaishnava skin? I am sorry if this offends you but I am against christian nonsense like this so it is fair that I give you guys the same treatment when fellow vaishnavas start talking nonsense.

Hinduism is not a dogma...since when are hindus scripture quoters and parrots that just vomit out some shlokas without understanding the context and without having any respect for other sects. Please try to understand the beauty of Dharma and not degrade it by just parroting some texts.

Dear Satay,I am not a "christian hiding in a vaishnava skin"!
I "parrot" the verses of the scriptures because I want serve God and follow His rules.
Please read what Lord Krishna says in Srimad Bhagavad-Gita,Chapter 16:
23.He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own whims attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination.
24.One should therefore understand what is duty and what is not duty by the regulations of the scriptures. Knowing such rules and regulations, one should act so that he may gradually be elevated.


Please note the following example.
The conchshell and cow dung are bone and stool of two living beings. But because they have been recommended by the Vedas as pure, people we have to accept them as such because of the authority of the Vedas.If one argues that since cow dung is pure, the stool of a learned brahmana is still more pure, his argument will not be accepted. Cow dung is accepted, and the stool of a highly posted brahmana is rejected.

And then I consider Hinduism a too general word.It means many different religions:vaishnavism,shaivism,tantrism ecc.
I don't recognize my-self as an hindu.And I don't like to called hindu,I recognize my-self as and I am a Sri vaishnava of Ramanuja-sampradaya.Even ISKCON followers don't recognize their-self as hindus.And I think this is right.

Then please note that according to Visistadvaita/Sri Vaishnavism a mukta has equal bliss like Lord Vishnu Him-self.

Regards,
Orlando.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
08 May 2006, 11:57 PM
I'm noticing more and more how Prabhupada's purports and Prabhupada's translations of the texts sound identical--not in the content but in the wording style. This allows me to conclude that these translations are doctored or at least biased because the translations sound like Prabhupada talking instead of Krishna talking. ~BYS~

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
09 May 2006, 12:05 AM
ISKCON followers don't recognize their-self as hindus.And I think this is right.


If they don't consider themselves Hindus, then they have no right telling others what is Hinduism and what isn't Hinduism. They also have no reason to be debating their views on a Hindu board. If this is the case, we should hold them to the same standards as Christians and Muslims and thus ban them when they preach to us here since we don't allow non-Hindus to come here and preach.

This isn't new to me. Hare Krishnas consider themselves Hindu at times and not Hindu at other times whenever it is convenient. I've seen how they will call themselves a Hindu organization when it is time to gather large numbers of people into the temples and gather big donations. When Hindus start questioning their practices, however, then suddenly they say they are not Hindu. ~BYS~

sarabhanga
09 May 2006, 12:49 AM
Namaste Orlando,

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and I admire your enthusiasm; but as in any family, to be properly recognized as a member of that family requires more than just proclaiming ďI am an XĒ. Someone that is already initiated into a Sampradaya must in effect vouch for you as a member ~ ďYes, he is one of oursĒ.

In traditional Hinduism, your Hindu parents or your Hindu Guru must formally accept you or adopt you as one of their own before you can claim any proper identity as a Hindu.

Exactly the same is true of all Hindu Sampradayas, which require more than a one-sided commitment.

Go ahead and learn as much as you can about Ramanujaís teaching, and by all means try to follow the example of wise Shri Vaishnavas, but at this stage just follow your true heart and make yourself the best aspiring Shri Vaishnava you can be. And at the appropriate time a suitable Guru will appear before you and proclaim, ďYes, Orlando is a true Shri VaishnavaĒ ~ although ďOrlandoĒ will be replaced by your proper Hindu name (given by your Guru). :)

orlando
09 May 2006, 02:08 AM
Thanks for your comments,Shri Sarabhanga.

orlando
09 May 2006, 03:22 PM
Namaste all.
Dear Satay I found other verses.The words are of Lord Kapila,an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.First before quote the verse I must show that Lord Kapila is really an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.The following verses are the proofs.
Please read Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 1,Chapter 3:
(10) Fifth with the name of Kapila He gave an exposition to the brahmin ¬suri on the nature of metaphysics and the elements of creation as through time the knowledge was lost.

Now Srimad Bhagavat Purana,Canto 2,Chapter 7,where Lord Brahma descripts the Lord's avataras to sage Narada.
(3) Next He took birth in the house of the twice born Kardama ['the shadow of the Creator'], from the womb of DevahŻti ['the invocation of the Gods'] accompanied by nine women. In teaching His mother as Lord Kapila ['the analytic one'] in spiritual realization, she in that life was freed from the soul-covering material modes and achieved liberation.


Now please read the words of Lord Kapila at Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 3,Chapter 31:
(31) Engaged in actions in the service of the body, is the soul, bound thereto, going repeatedly for another life in the material condition and thus pursuing the physical, because of that bondage to the dark motives of fruitive action, is a hindrance formed [the socalled kles'as]. (32) If, with the unrighteous on his path, he associates endeavoring for the pleasure of his genitals and stomach, does the living entity enter the darkness as before. (33) Thus associated he loses his sense of truth, purity, compassion and gravity; his spiritual intelligence, prosperity, modesty and his good name; his mercy, control of mind and senses and his fortune. (34) With coarse fools bereft of selfrealization one is of bad association and one should not try to make it with the pitiable women and their dancing dogs. (35) No association of a man gives an infatuation and bondage to other things like that of a man attached to women or a fellowship of men attached to women. (36) The father of man [Brahm‚] bewildered at the sight of his own daughter as a stag ran shamelessly to her when he saw her in the form of a deer [compare 3-12-28]. (37) Except for the wise N‚r‚yana, there is among all the living entities born from Brahm‚ indeed no male who's intelligence is not distracted by M‚y‚ in the form of a woman.

(38) Behold the strength of My M‚y‚ in the shape of a woman that even makes the conquerors of the world follow her to her heels by the mere movement of an eyebrow. (39) One who aspires to reach the culmination of yoga should never live together with a woman; they say that to the selfrealization obtained by rendering service to Me, cohabiting with women is the gateway to hell for such a one. (40) The woman created by God represents M‚y‚ slowly encroaching, which must be regarded, like a dead well covered by grass, as death for the soul. (41) She, who from being attached to women became a woman, thinks, due to the illusion of My m‚y‚, that coming to the form of a man will bring her wealth, progeny and a house. (42) She herself should [similarly] consider the m‚y‚ of it, consisting of her husband, children and house, as the death brought about by His authority that is alike the singing of the hunter.

I used the translation at http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/canto3/chapter31.html

Regards,
Orlando.

satay
09 May 2006, 03:55 PM
Namaste all.
Dear Satay I found other verses.The words are of Lord Kapila,an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.First before quote the verse I must show that Lord Kapila is really an incarnation of Lord Vishnu.The following verses are the proofs.
Orlando.

namaste,
what are you still trying to prove orlando?

If you are trying to prove that women are inferior then I reject that idea I don't care what scripture you throw at me (hindu scriptures included).

Hinduism is about practical stuff it's not burried in scriptures it's a living thing...feel it!!

orlando
09 May 2006, 04:06 PM
Satay,I am NOT a sexist.I would never dare to say that women are inferior!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was proving that scriptures are against your idea that one should have pleasure like devas.Those verse and other verses I posted earlier show that your idea of material enjoyment is wrong.

orlando
09 May 2006, 04:12 PM
The scriptures,as far as I know,don't say that women are inferior.
Please read what Manu says in the third chapter of Manu Smrti:
55. Women must be honoured and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law, who desire (their own) welfare.
56. Where women are honoured, there the gods are pleased; but where they are not honoured, no sacred rite yields rewards.

orlando
13 June 2006, 12:34 PM
Namaste all.
Satay,I am happy to say that again I found other verses!!! :Roll:

(7) Seeing a woman does one who didn't conquer his senses, enticed with that seductive illusory energy of God, blind fall down into the darkness, just like a moth falls into the fire. (8) Upon seeing the clothing, golden ornaments and so on of women as arranged by m‚y‚, does a person of no discrimination aroused by lusty desires with the desire for sense-gratification no doubt, the way a moth is destroyed, find his intelligence ruined.
[...]
(13) A mendicant shouldn't touch a girl not even a one of wood or with his foot, since by the bodily contact one is captured like an elephant is captured with a she-elephant. (14) A man of wisdom should - death to himself - never chase a woman, as he'll be destroyed as an elephant [in competition] is by others superior in strength.
[...]
(18) Taking pleasure in vulgar dancing, musical entertainment and such songs, fell Rishyas'ringa, the son of MrigÓ , fully controlled as a plaything under the control of women. Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 11,Chapter 8

(1) Lord Rishabha said: 'My dear sons: This body carried by all within this material world does not deserve the troublesome of the sense-gratification of dogs and hogs, but is worth the trouble of the austerities and penances for the sake of the divine from which the heart becomes purified and for certain an unending spiritual happiness is found. (2) Serving the great ones, one says, is the way of liberation and to seek the association of the ones who are attached to women is the way of the dungeon, of darkness; the highly advanced are people who in the spiritual have an equal regard for all, they are situated in peace, do not feel offended, wish all the best and know how to behave.Srimad Bhagavatam,Canto 5,Chapter 5

(13) What of the food grains, barley, gold, animals and women in this world; they do not satisfy the mind of the person that is a victim of lust. (14) Never at any time will the lust of the lusty be pacified under enjoyment just like feeding fire with butter again and again indeed will ever more increase the fire. (15) When a man does not envy, nor goes at the detriment of any living being will, of that person who then has an equal vision, all directions be in a happy position [see also B.G. 2: 56, 2: 71 , & 4: 10]. (16) That which is so difficult to forsake for people that are too attached, that root cause of all tribulation not overcome even when crippled by old age, such a desire, should by the one who seeks happiness be given up. (17) With one's mother, one's sister or one's daughter either should one sit close as the senses so very strong will even agitate the most learned.Srimad Bhagavata Purana,Canto 9,Chapter 19

I hope you enjoyed to read them.:D :Roll:

Regards,
Orlando.

orlando
13 June 2006, 12:37 PM
Satay,if you have no faith in my words,you may read Srimad Bhagavatam at http://www.srimadbhagavatam.org/contents.html

Regards,
Orlando.

orlando
12 July 2006, 12:32 PM
Namaste all.
Dear Satay,I have to tell you a thing.
As a Sri vaishnava I should be chaste pure and have to do with ladies only as far as necessary.
However in my mind I am tempted to ask to a my sister's friend to go out along with me.
I'd like to be his boy-friend.
I hope that Bhagavan Narayana will forgive my lustful wickedness.
Regards,
Orlando.

satay
12 July 2006, 02:25 PM
Namaste all.
Dear Satay,I have to tell you a thing.
As a Sri vaishnava I should be chaste pure and have to do with ladies only as far as necessary.
However in my mind I am tempted to ask to a my sister's friend to go out along with me.
I'd like to be his boy-friend.
I hope that Bhagavan Narayana will forgive my lustful wickedness.
Regards,
Orlando.

Thank you for sharing this with me.

satay
12 July 2006, 02:31 PM
Namaste all.
Satay,I am happy to say that again I found other verses!!! :Roll:

Okay. I see that makes you very happy. Good for you.




I hope you enjoyed to read them.:D :Roll:

Regards,
Orlando.

Actually, I have to tell you a thing. Most of the time when you just dump stuff especially in bold and red etc. on this forum, I can not read it as I have hard time concentrating on all these bold texts.

I prefer to read posts where the poster has given some of his opinion or at least not used the formatting that you use. This is just a personal problem of mine and not your fault.

Sorry for this.

orlando
13 July 2006, 09:51 AM
I prefer to read posts where the poster has given some of his opinion


Namaste Satay.
When one can read the opinion of Bhagavan Him-self,why should I give my own opinion?
I am a servant of God.He is the Master.
Regards,
Orlando.

satay
13 July 2006, 10:39 AM
Namaste Satay.
When one can read the opinion of Bhagavan Him-self,why should I give my own opinion?
I am a servant of God.He is the Master.
Regards,
Orlando.

namaste orlando,
in that case, a link to bhagwan's opinion is sufficient.

orlando
13 July 2006, 10:44 AM
namaste orlando,
in that case, a link to bhagwan's opinion is sufficient.

Namaste Satay.
I don't think so.

orlando
26 July 2006, 11:42 AM
Actually, I have to tell you a thing. Most of the time when you just dump stuff especially in bold and red etc. on this forum, I can not read it as I have hard time concentrating on all these bold texts.

I prefer to read posts where the poster has given some of his opinion or at least not used the formatting that you use. This is just a personal problem of mine and not your fault.

Sorry for this.

Namaste Satay.
I think that your true problem is another one.
Please read what Sri Swami Sivananda says in his book "Practice of Brahmacharya".
By http://www.dlshq.org/download/brahma_nopic.htm#_Toc441556936
For a passionate worldly-minded man, the terms Self-realization, God, Self, Vairagya, renunciation, death and burial ground are very revolting and terrifying, because he is attached to objects. The terms singing, dancing, talks about women and so on are very pleasing.


Please note that by quoting those Sivananda's words and by writing the following,I am not reffering only to you but to all people in general.And I don't mean to offend anyone.

This thread Call to Vaishnavas-Human life is not made for pleasure!!!! can be compared to a knife of a doctor. The doctor's knife cruely removes the tumor with much pain, but removing the tumor ultimately restores good health in the patient.So is this thread.It is a knife into the heart of worldliness.

Regards,
Orlando.

satay
26 July 2006, 08:10 PM
Namaste Satay.
I think that your true problem is another one.


namaste Orlando,
Thanks for letting me know about my problem. Very kind of you.

regards,

willie
26 July 2006, 08:58 PM
We are not in the bad old day and medicine has come along way, so if there is pain get a lawyer and take it to court.

Living an austere life does not get you any closer to enlightment or god than living any other way.

Back in the bad old day, socalled holymen lied a lot about other relgions and got away with it because the general population did not know anything about other countries. But those days have changed.

orlando
31 July 2006, 10:53 AM
namaste Orlando,
Thanks for letting me know about my problem. Very kind of you.

regards,

Namaste Satay.
Please read my thread in Hot Topic.You will see that that is also a problem of mine.I have been only an hypocrite.
On contrary,you are very truthful and talk openly about your ideas.I noted this by reading your post.You are person much more better than me.
Regards,
Orlando.

satay
31 July 2006, 04:54 PM
Namaste Satay.
Please read my thread in Hot Topic.You will see that that is also a problem of mine.I have been only an hypocrite.
On contrary,you are very truthful and talk openly about your ideas.I noted this by reading your post.You are person much more better than me.
Regards,
Orlando.

namaste orlando,
Again, I will say that you are being too hard on yourself! You were not being hypocrite you were just telling us the orthodox views and translations that you found on the internet.

My personal views should not to be followed by any devout hindu as my views do not align with orthodox hinduism.

I am not better than you! To the contrary, I am surprised at how much devotion you have at this very young age!! At your age, I was a confirmed atheist and thousands of miles away from Bhagwan's feet!