PDA

View Full Version : Feel Attracted to ISKCON



ScottMalaysia
26 June 2008, 01:22 AM
Last Sunday night, my wife and I visited the ISKCON temple. We'd gone to the Sathya Sai Baba temple that was opposite the ISKCON temple, as a lady who ran a bookshop in Kuala Lumpur invited us there for bhajans. When I saw the ISKCON temple from the Sai temple, I was filled with a sense of deepest longing to be there. I had and do still have some issues with ISKCON, but those disappeared as soon as I saw the temple. After the Sai bhajans had finished, my wife and I went to the ISKCON temple. It was really nice, and it felt really spiritual. We went back on Tuesday night for the evening programme, and talked to the temple president. I discussed with him some of the issues that I have with ISKCON, mainly that Krishna is the Supreme and all the other gods are His servants. I purchased a copy of Bhagavad-Gita As It Is. The service was lovely, and I especially liked the kirtan. I'd visited a non-ISKCON Krishna temple before, and it was nice, but they had no Kirtan. I love the Gaudiya Arati, and I realised that every type of puja I've seen, I've compared it to the Gaudiya Arati that I'd seen several years ago at the ISKCON temple in New Zealand.

One of the men there told me that he was a Shiva devotee, and then Lord Shiva appeared to him in a dream and told him to go to Krishna. He didn't, and Lord Shiva appeared to him several more times, and on two instances Lord Shiva prophesised the death of his mother, and then his brother. The last time, he said that the man himself would die if he didn't go to Krishna. He went, and then his family started going to the Krishna temple as well.

I'm feeling spiritually confused at the moment - I love the ISKCON temple with the chanting, kirtan and beautiful arati, but I don't know if I can follow their strict lifestyle - being vegetarian, not having caffeine (there goes McDonald's and Coca-Cola), or chanting 16 rounds of the Hare Krishna mantra. I don't know exactly how my wife feels - she loves the food and likes the temple, but I'm not sure if she wants to be part of it.

Does anyone here know of any Shaivites who joined ISKCON, or any ISKCON devotees who left and became Shaivites? And does anyone know of any other Gaudiya Vaishnava groups that 1) have the same practices as ISKCON such as kirtan, but 2) aren't as strict as ISKCON, and 3) have a centre in Kuala Lumpur or somewhere in Malaysia?

Please share any thoughts and advice that you have for me.

bhargavsai
26 June 2008, 02:23 AM
My advice is to never believe in any person who claims truth to be exclusive. Nor believe in anyone/anything which claims something is inferior to their own.

ISKCON is primarily a organization which supports duality school of thought, and discards the principles which form an important part of Vedas. It discards impersonal brahman(spirit), and disgraces other subsects of hinduism like Shaiva, Shakta etc.

The Aarti, Pooja, Chants etc are for purification of mind. They make mind focussed(concentrated). When mind concentrates then bliss and happiness automatically comes(like when you watch a great movie).

So it does not matter whether you do pooja, chanting on your own or in a organization. But do them, and purify the mind, concentrate it.

They follow strict rules for self-control. With self-control spirituality is attained easily.

So you can join ISKCON or you can do it in your house. Because self-control comes from within you.

It does not matter whether you join Vaishnava or other organizations. If you want my advice join Ramakrishna Mission. A great organization without any partiality to any sects.
--------------------

And it seems funny that Shiva comes in dreams and warns a person if he does not worship Krishna then he would die. It is either made up or just a infatuation. Shiva is no way lesser to Krishna, verily "All is One". You shall know it in future may it take another million years.

yajvan
28 June 2008, 06:52 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste ScottMalaysia

First let me say I do not have your answer. The answer is in you. Because you have freedom, remember you can change your mind at a later time. Consider going at a pace that is commensurate with your experience and your knowledge.
What you may have to give up may be small to what you will gain? You may need to consider your lifestyle ( food intake and the like) at a different time. That said, you mention
I love the ISKCON temple with the chanting, kirtan and beautiful arati,

I will assume, your adoration is directed to Krsna, yes? It just so happens ISKCON translates that in a way that is attractive to you I suspect. It would seem to me to ponder the relationship with Krsna first. Then the ISKCON question , food intake, all that will fall in line.

Perhaps going to the temple more often... enjoy the environment, soak it up. Get comfortable in it and see if there is some additional information that will unfold, by being in the environment more. I have found this helps. Perhaps you will find your answer in this fashion.

Regarding the man that talked of Siva... that applies to him not to you. We do not know of his experience and what happened. So we respect the man's experience, but that was him not you.

pranams

devotee
28 June 2008, 09:47 PM
Dear Scott,

Bhargavasai & yajvan have given good advice. Let me add from my side :

I have accepted Lord Krishna as my Guru, Guide & God & has been taking inspirations from his teachings for years together. It pains me to hear the following :



One of the men there told me that he was a Shiva devotee, and then Lord Shiva appeared to him in a dream and told him to go to Krishna. He didn't, and Lord Shiva appeared to him several more times, and on two instances Lord Shiva prophesised the death of his mother, and then his brother. The last time, he said that the man himself would die if he didn't go to Krishna. He went, and then his family started going to the Krishna temple as well.


He will kill you if you don't worship Him ? --- That makes look Lord Krishna highly egoist ! Please don't degrade Lord Krishna, the yogeshwar, the SELF of all, to such a low level. Read Bhagwat Gita which is the essence of the Vedanta & then you will know that there is no difference in Lord Krishna, the Lord Shiva & others. The differences are in names & forms & seemingly different worshipping methodologies ... but those differences are due to varying requirements of various devotees & not because one form of God is greater than the other ! This is simply a conditioned way of thinking of those people who have come from Abrahmic religions where the God has been shown to be extremely egoist & highly possessive. If God is like that then I would prefer to go without such a God !

There is just ONE without a second, my dear. That ONE is the all there is. You may give It any name, any form, any characteristics but It is really without any name, any form and devoid of any characteristics that we may think of. By giving Him a name who is without name, by giving Him a form which is formless we try to bring the Infinite to finite limits so that He who cannot be realised through our limited mental grasping capacity can be toned down to that level which we can grasp & relate to.



By making pilgrimage to Thee (to a form in a temple of worship) Thy all-pervasiveness has been defiled by me. With my meditation, Thy transcendence of the mind has been defiled by me. By singing your praise Thy transcendence of speech has been defiled by me. Ever forgive me these three sins. ---- ( AvadhUta Gita, VIII.I)

And So, by giving you a particular name & seeing you in a particular form I have committed sins against your INFINITE all pervasive, unthinkable nature; O' God, please forgive me for these sins ( which is inescapable due to my limited character) ! :)

OM

ScottMalaysia
29 June 2008, 09:48 PM
He will kill you if you don't worship Him ? --- That makes look Lord Krishna highly egoist !

He never said that Lord Krishna would kill him. The man said that Lord Shiva only told him that he would die if he didn't go to the Krishna temple. That doesn't mean that Krishna would kill him - I'm assuming that something might have been going to happen to him that would result in his death, like an accident, and only Krishna could prevent it. If Lord Shiva couldn't prevent it, what does that say about him?


Please don't degrade Lord Krishna, the yogeshwar, the SELF of all, to such a low level. Read Bhagwat Gita which is the essence of the Vedanta & then you will know that there is no difference in Lord Krishna, the Lord Shiva & others. The differences are in names & forms & seemingly different worshipping methodologies ... but those differences are due to varying requirements of various devotees & not because one form of God is greater than the other !

I talked with a devotee at the temple yesterday, and he said that there are 64 qualities of God, and that Lord Shiva possesses only 56.



There is just ONE without a second, my dear. That ONE is the all there is. You may give It any name, any form, any characteristics but It is really without any name, any form and devoid of any characteristics that we may think of. By giving Him a name who is without name, by giving Him a form which is formless we try to bring the Infinite to finite limits so that He who cannot be realised through our limited mental grasping capacity can be toned down to that level which we can grasp & relate to.

Doesn't the Bhagavad-Gita say that the personal form of God is the highest level of God realization?

Baobobtree
29 June 2008, 11:05 PM
Namaste Scott.


I talked with a devotee at the temple yesterday, and he said that there are 64 qualities of God, and that Lord Shiva possesses only 56. I think Shvetashvatara Upanishad, knows a bit more about God then this devotee. And in Shvetashvatara Upanishad 3.11 we find
All this universe is in the glory of God, of Siva, the God of love. The heads and faces of men are His own, and He is in the hearts of all. Sure doesn't sound like an incomplete form of God.


Doesn't the Bhagavad-Gita say that the personal form of God is the highest level of God realization? Personally I agree with this, but I don't believe this God Devotee just described is impersonal.

devotee
30 June 2008, 12:38 AM
I'm assuming that something might have been going to happen to him that would result in his death, like an accident, and only Krishna could prevent it. If Lord Shiva couldn't prevent it, what does that say about him?

Have no doubts. If Shiva cannot prevent it, then Krishna too can't do it. This presumption is coming from ignorance & has no leg to stand on.


I talked with a devotee at the temple yesterday, and he said that there are 64 qualities of God, and that Lord Shiva possesses only 56.

Has he reailsed God ? If not, let him quote some authority i.e. shruti to support his views.


Doesn't the Bhagavad-Gita say that the personal form of God is the highest level of God realization?

No. Lord Krishna says that the highest level of God realisation is in Jnan Yoga & in admiration of Jnani he says that a Jnani is just another form of Him only. Mind it, he has not praised any devotee like this.

Regarding Shiva, he says, " I am Shankara among the eleven Rudras". Read Chapter-10 of Bhagwat Gita wherein you will find that same God has many forms & names. Understanding true meaning of Bhagwat Gita is possible only when one has true understanding of the Upanishads. Lord Krishna has been likened to be the milkman who has milked the cows i.e. the Upanishads to get the milk i.e. the highest knowledge in the form of Bhagwat Gita. Do the Upanishads differentiate between Lord Krishna & Lord Shiva ? They only talk about the SELF, The ONE without a second. There is no room left for duality, here ! :)

OM

ScottMalaysia
30 June 2008, 04:59 AM
I looked up that verse in the Shvetashvetara Upanishad and one translation used 'Bhagavan' and 'Lord' instead of Shiva. I'd like to see the original Sanskrit, but I can't find it online.

The Gita Mahatmya, a part of the Padma Purana, is a dialogue between Lord Shiva and Mother Parvati. Lord Shiva says:

ekam sastram devaki-putra-gitam
eko devo devaki-putra eva
eko mantras tasya namani yani
karmapy ekam tasya devasya seva (Gita-mahatmya 7)

(7) In this present day, people are very eager to have one scripture, one God, one religion, and one occupation. So Therefore, ekam sastram devaki-putra-gitam: let there beone scripture only,one common scripture, for the whole world—Bhagavad-gita. And Eko devo devaki-putra eva: let there be one God only for the whole world—Sri Krsna. Eko mantras tasya namani: And one hymn, one mantra, one prayer only—the chanting of His name: Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. Karmapy ekam tasya devasya seva: And let there be one work only—the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

devotee
30 June 2008, 05:11 AM
I looked up that verse in the Shvetashvetara Upanishad and one translation used 'Bhagavan' and 'Lord' instead of Shiva. I'd like to see the original Sanskrit, but I can't find it online.

The Gita Mahatmya, a part of the Padma Purana, is a dialogue between Lord Shiva and Mother Parvati. Lord Shiva says:

ekam sastram devaki-putra-gitam
eko devo devaki-putra eva
eko mantras tasya namani yani
karmapy ekam tasya devasya seva (Gita-mahatmya 7)

(7) In this present day, people are very eager to have one scripture, one God, one religion, and one occupation. So Therefore, ekam sastram devaki-putra-gitam: let there beone scripture only,one common scripture, for the whole world—Bhagavad-gita. And Eko devo devaki-putra eva: let there be one God only for the whole world—Sri Krsna. Eko mantras tasya namani: And one hymn, one mantra, one prayer only—the chanting of His name: Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. Karmapy ekam tasya devasya seva: And let there be one work only—the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead."

Namaste Scott,
Why don't you read other Puranas like Devi Bhagwat, Vishnu Purana, Shiva Purana too ? You will have enough material to get confused in deciding who is higher than who ! Their (Puranas's) meaning have to be understood in correct perspective. They are written for a particular section of devotees in mind & to that extent they are true only relatively but not in absolute sense. In Devi Bhagwat, nothing is considered supreme to the Mother Goddess. Same is true for for Shiva in Shiva Purana. These are relative truths. Anything written anywhere if contradicting with the Shruti is no authority to decide a dispute. Shruti are the only authority.

Lord Krishna is supreme, no doubt, but Shiva is too because they are basically the same except the name & the form.

OM

ScottMalaysia
30 June 2008, 12:19 PM
Rig Veda 1:22:20 "The princes evermore behold that loftiest place where Viṣṇu is,Laid as it were an eye in heaven."

The Purusha Sukta (Rig Veda 10:90) refers to Purusha, the Supreme Being. Commentators of the Rig Veda have written that Purusha refer to Lord Vishnu.

Rig Veda 10:82:6 "The waters verily first retained the embryo in which all the gods were aggregated, single deposited on the navel of the unborn (creator), in which all beings abide. The reference to the navel of the unborn is an indication of reference to Vishnu."

Rig Veda: V.I.15b.3 "O ye who wish to gain realization of the supreme truth, utter the name of Vishnu at least once in the steadfast faith that it will lead you to such realization."

Katha Upanishad 1:3:9 "A man who has discrimination for his charioteer and holds the reins of the mind firmly, reaches the end of the road; and that is the supreme position of Vishnu."

And the Brahma-Samhita is full of quotes by Lord Brahma who attests the fact that Lord Krishna is the Supreme.

Baobobtree
30 June 2008, 01:51 PM
I looked up that verse in the Shvetashvetara Upanishad and one translation used 'Bhagavan' and 'Lord' instead of Shiva. I'd like to see the original Sanskrit, but I can't find it online. Here you go- http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dd5ssrbd_30gbb96wgw

Though, even this translation doesn't translate it into English as referring to Shiva, we can clearly see from the Sanskrit rendition of this verse, that this verse refers to Lord Shiva.


sarvānana-śiro-grīvaḥ sarva-bhūta-guhāśayaḥ |
sarva-vyāpī sa bhagavāṃs tasmāt sarva-gataḥ śivaḥ ||11||

All faces are His faces; all heads, His heads; all necks, His necks. He dwells in the hearts of all beings. He is the all-pervading Bhagavan. Therefore He is the omnipresent and benign Lord.

atanu
30 June 2008, 02:53 PM
Rig Veda 1:22:20 "The princes evermore behold that loftiest place where Viṣṇu is,Laid as it were an eye in heaven."


Scott,

I hope that we may put effort to attain that eye in the heaven instead of trying to prove the superiority of one faith over another.

Alternately, you may like to go through an earlier discussion.

http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2381 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2381)

Summary is provided below.

Veda says of Rudra:

Namo hridayyaya cha niveshpya ya cha
Salutations to Him who is in hridayyaya and in the grace.

Namo vah kirikebhyo devanam hrudayou bhyo
Salutations to you who showers grace and who dwell in the hearts of the Gods.


Lord Krishna says of Rudra

tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham

Therefore, I worship Rudra first as my own Self.


Lord Krishna also says:

yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu
rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam
loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is One only who is worshipped.
--------------------

Om
visva Atman is in rudro
rudro is in visva Atman

yajvan
30 June 2008, 04:04 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~




I hope that we may put effort to attain that eye in the heaven instead of trying to prove the superiority of one faith over another.

Namaste atanu (et.al)

We have seen this conversation mulitiple times on HDF, who is Supreme, who is less... it is the native with even vision, that knows the essence, sāram, of all that exists.
Yet what does Kṛṣṇa say Himself? We can look to the Bhāgavad gītā for insight... Since this Bhāgavad gītā is part and parcel of the Mahabharata¹, Lets look and see how Kṛṣṇa describes Rudra in the Anusadana Parva, Section CLXI, He says the following:

It is he who is always engaged in all that is good and evil in the three worlds. In consequence of his fullest control over all objects of enjoyment he is called Iswara (the Supreme Lord or Master). Since, again, he is the master of the vast universe, he is called Maheswara.

The whole universe is pervaded by him in diverse forms. It is that deity whose mouth roars and burns the waters of the sea in the form of the huge mare's head!


I see no difference between MahaViṣṇu, Viṣṇuyaśā, Kṛṣṇa and Ruda... All are expressions of the Divine, Anuttara, Supreme, Pūrṇāhantā ( the Full Universal Atman, Self).

To find the differences, then there is some mis-understandings; As if one wishes to tell the difference between a gold chalise, gold bauble and gold ring. We are viewing gold in different forms... In the Supreme we are talking of just different views of the Divine.

pranams


1. Kṛṣṇa's review of Maheswara at this HDF post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=21582&postcount=5

Vishnuh -The term Vishnu is rooted in the sukta:Veveshti Vyaapnoti iti Vishnuh - That which pervades everywhere is Vishnu

Kaos
30 June 2008, 06:16 PM
It would seem to me to ponder the relationship with Krsna first. Then the ISKCON question , food intake, all that will fall in line.




Very good advise from yajvan. Thank you.

This reminds me of Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 18, verse 65:

"Always think of Me, become my devotee, worship Me, and offer your homage unto Me. Thus you will come to me without fail. I promise you this because you are My very dear friend."

devotee
30 June 2008, 09:46 PM
Rig Veda 1:22:20 "The princes evermore behold that loftiest place where Viṣṇu is,Laid as it were an eye in heaven."

The Purusha Sukta (Rig Veda 10:90) refers to Purusha, the Supreme Being. Commentators of the Rig Veda have written that Purusha refer to Lord Vishnu.

Rig Veda 10:82:6 "The waters verily first retained the embryo in which all the gods were aggregated, single deposited on the navel of the unborn (creator), in which all beings abide. The reference to the navel of the unborn is an indication of reference to Vishnu."

Rig Veda: V.I.15b.3 "O ye who wish to gain realization of the supreme truth, utter the name of Vishnu at least once in the steadfast faith that it will lead you to such realization."

Katha Upanishad 1:3:9 "A man who has discrimination for his charioteer and holds the reins of the mind firmly, reaches the end of the road; and that is the supreme position of Vishnu."

And the Brahma-Samhita is full of quotes by Lord Brahma who attests the fact that Lord Krishna is the Supreme.

Namaste Scott,

It is heartening to see your zeal for perfecting your faith. :)

Whatever you have quoted are proving that Sri Krishna or Lord Vishnu is the Supreme. There is no doubt over Lord Krishna or Vishnu being Supreme. But please re-read all those verses : do they say that Shiva is inferior/junior to Lord Vishnu or they are different. If that was there then this verse, "Ekam Sat Vipra Bahudha Vadanti" would get refuted. So, that cannot be true. See what Vishnu Sahasranama says :

"Sarvah sharvah shivah sthānuh
bhootādir nidhir avyayah;
Sambhavo bhāvano bharta
prabhavah prabhur ishvarah"

So, that leaves no doubt that Vishnu himself is Shiva.

Let's see some verses from Rudra Hridaya Upanishad belonging to Krishna Yajurveda :

Shuka asks his father sage Vyasa : “Who is the real God of Gods? In whom are all these existences established? By worshipping whom, can I please the Devas in whole?” To this question, Sage Vyasa replies, " Rudra is the Self of all Devas; all Devas are merely different manifestations of Shiva Himself."

"Rudra is Man. Umā is Woman.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Brahmā. Umā is Sarasvatī.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Vishnu. Umā is Lakshmī.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is the Sun. Umā is the Shadow.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is the Moon. Umā is the Stars.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is the Day. Umā is the Night.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Yajña (sacrifice). Umā is Vedi (altar).
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Agni (fire). Umā is Svāhā (oblation).
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Veda. Umā is Shāstra.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Tree. Umā is Creeper.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Scent. Umā is Flower.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is Meaning. Umā is Word.
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her.
Rudra is the Lingam. Umā is Pitha (base).
Prostrations to Him, Prostrations to Her."

OM Namah Shivaya !

ScottMalaysia
30 June 2008, 10:27 PM
My intention in creating this thread was not to start a debate.

I worship Krishna as the Supreme Lord, and I don't think that I could go back to being a Shiva devotee. The ISKCON temple is so beautiful, the worship so lovely, the kirtan and the bhajans are really spiritual, and the devotees are really friendly and always able to help or discuss spiritual matters. In contrast, our local Amman temple (Saivite) has individual puja and no bhajans and definitely no kirtan. Devotees are often few and far between, and those who speak English often do not know very much about the faith. The priests speak almost no English and therefore cannot help non-Indian devotees grow in their faith. I no longer have any desire to worship in the Amman temple or any Shiva temples, just like someone who has eaten a lovely fried rice wouldn't want to eat plain boiled rice any more.

atanu
30 June 2008, 10:34 PM
My intention in creating this thread was not to start a debate.

- just like someone who has eaten a lovely fried rice wouldn't want to eat plain boiled rice any more.

Scott,

You have a point. Shiva temples usually offer no sweet prasad and not much sweet fragrance but only ash -- yes. The pure residuum and nothing more. It is a reminder.

Contentment in Self is the goal but on the way if you wish to be humoured with good flavoured rice then its OK. But please remember that flavoured fried rice would not be there in absence of plain rice.

Om

satay
01 July 2008, 12:23 AM
Scott,

Hari bol!

Enjoy the sweet nectar of the Lord. Do kirtan, enjoy the temple, satsang with the devotees and eat loads of parsadam.

Share your experiences here with us.

Best wishes,
:)

yajvan
01 July 2008, 07:14 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,

when the seeker has found his way, all the stars in the sky rejoice.


pranams

bhargavsai
15 August 2008, 12:57 PM
Scott Malaysia

You are limiting the Infinite by treating Shiva and Krishna as different. Don't you know that Krishna is present in everyone and everything? One may chant the mantra million times, one may meditate for thousands of years, yet one is not spiritual until he sees Krishna everywhere and in everything. Until that one is a not born spiritually.

I said this because you said you cannot go back and worship Shiva, whereas Krishna is present in Shiva as well, and it means that you do not see Krishna in everything...

Pankaja
23 August 2008, 08:18 PM
Click HTTP on left-side for links,
http://www.archive.org/details/Bhaktivedanta-Narayana5 or direct link to the book
http://ia311503.us.archive.org/2/items/Bhaktivedanta-Narayana5/Shiva-tattva.zip

shangopriest
24 August 2008, 03:58 AM
lord shiva , lord krishna , all devas , god and goddesses all are different but the same , we just have different views and understant the ultimate god in many different ways , i am a priest of an african deity called shango very similar to the indra deva and many of the deities in the yoruba panteon are in many ways similar to some deities of sanatan dharma , so the presence of god have many faces , om namah shiva

bhakta
03 November 2008, 11:20 AM
There is no doubt krishna is the supreme God. For all those who have doubts, refer to srimad bhagavatam and brahma samhita. And of course the bhagavad Gita where krsna himself proclaims it. why do you want to look any further?

Yogkriya
21 December 2008, 07:10 AM
There is no doubt krishna is the supreme God. For all those who have doubts, refer to srimad bhagavatam and brahma samhita. And of course the bhagavad Gita where krsna himself proclaims it. why do you want to look any further?

If you belong to Iskcon or gaudiya sects, most probably you will consider Lord Krishn as supreme only and reject Shiva as a mere "demigod"!
But Lord Krishna says a lot more in Bhagvad Gita which dear devotees of Iskcon/gaudiya philosophy ignore. If you refer and accept Brahm Samhita, also accept Shiv Samhita and Shiva MahaPuran! Kindly notice -

upadrastanumanta ca
bharta bhokta mahesvarah
paramatmeti capy ukto
dehe 'smin purusah parah (Bhagavad Gita 13:23)

"Yet in this body there is another, a transcendental enjoyer who is MAHESHWARA, the supreme proprietor, who exists as the overseer and permitter, and who is known as Paramatma,the Supreme soul of universe".

santosh
03 February 2009, 06:42 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,

Please understand that in ISKCON (that is in Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya) Lord Shiva is always given highest respect. Lord Shiva is Highest Vaishnava. In ISKCON we celebrate Maha Shiva Ratri. Some of our devotees were devotees of Lord Shiva before.

> "If you belong to Iskcon or gaudiya sects, most probably you will consider Lord Krishn as supreme only and reject Shiva as a mere "demigod"!"

Lord Shiva is not rejected as mere "demigod" because He is not a mere "demigod" as you understand it from ISKCON's philosophy. Lord Shiva is of "Shiva-Tattva" which is different from "Jiva-Tattva". All other Devi-Devatas (33 crore or 330 million of them) including upto Lord Brahma are of Jiva-Tattva. The position of Shiva-Tattva is always higher than that of Jiva-Tattva. However, Shiva-Tattva is not "Vishnu-Tattva" and that difference is there. Vishnu-Tattva is the Supreme Lord of everything that exists.

In BG 13.23, the word "Mahesvarah" means Maha + Isvarah. It refers to the Supreme Lord Himself. This word doesn't refer to Lord Shiva. It is true that one of the many names of Lord Shiva is Mahesvarah. Also true is that one of the many names of Supreme Lord Vishnu is Mahesvarah. Similarly the use of the word Bhagavan. It refers to Lord Krishna/Rama/Vishnu. However, this word is also used when refering to Lord Shiva as Bhagavan Shiv. Also this word is used in Srimad Bhagavatam to refer to Sri Narada Muni. That doesn't mean Sri Narada Muni is God. Sri Narada Muni is dear devotee of the Lord Krishna/Rama/Vishnu.

There is another story of Sri Narasih Mehta. He was a Shiva devotee. Lord Shiva was pleased with his devotion and gave him His Darshan. Lord Shiva instructed him to worship Lord Vishnu. Later Sri Narasih Mehta is considered a great Vaishnava. He composed the famous prayer song - Vaishnava Jana To.

Ganeshprasad
09 February 2009, 06:17 PM
Pranam Santosh ji


Hare Krishna everybody,

Please understand that in ISKCON (that is in Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya) Lord Shiva is always given highest respect. Lord Shiva is Highest Vaishnava. In ISKCON we celebrate Maha Shiva Ratri. Some of our devotees were devotees of Lord Shiva before.

Perhaps you can enlighten us all how you celebrate Maha Shiva ratri, which incidentally will soon be upon us.
do you like most of Hindus fast on the day, chant and sing his glory.

Jai Bholenath

Jai Shree Krishna

Eastern Mind
09 February 2009, 09:57 PM
This discussion is absurd, and is little more than petty bickering. The Sanatana Dharma would never condone such things. Here in my city we have 5 temples, 6 if you count the Sai center. There is so much intolerance its kind of ironic, given the supposed tolerance of our faith. There are a few of us, I suppose that have actually been to all 5 temples. Most would have never heard of the other ones even existing, the ethnocentricity is so narrow. Here are a few of the intolerant rude comments I've heard, unfortunately, and I am not making any of this up.

This place is just not a temple.
Oh, don't go to the Ganesh mandir, they don't do it right over there.
I would never go to the ISKCON temple. All they are concerned about is converting you.
A temple isn't a temple unless it has a Venkateshwara.
We started our own temple because as Fijians, the Brahmans didn't treat us well.
The priest has poor Sanskrit so I won't go there.
White people don't belong.
What? You can't bring food from home?
You mean there is somewhat of an unofficial dress code?
You have to drive so far, and they don't give us any say, so we just started our own temple.
I won't go there because everyone talks Hindi and I don't understand.
I won't go there because everyone talks Tamil and I don't understand.

Here is how I see it: We should all accept and follow a straight and narrow path, not a universalist one... mainly so that we can avoid confusion in our own minds as to which God is supreme, which scripture is right etc. We should do this from the heart chakra, with intuition, and what feels right to us, as individuals. Secondly we should support with prayer the efforts of all other Hindus, regardless of sect, belief, Ishta, etc. We should do this by attending other temples, and other satsangs than our own, and be expected to be treated as guests, as we would treat the occasional temple goers at our customary temple as guests...and we should make a point of doing this at least once every 2 to 3 years..in the spirit of Hindu solidarity. Aum Namasivaya

orlando
10 February 2009, 04:11 AM
I'm feeling spiritually confused at the moment - I love the ISKCON temple with the chanting, kirtan and beautiful arati, but I don't know if I can follow their strict lifestyle - being vegetarian, not having caffeine (there goes McDonald's and Coca-Cola), or chanting 16 rounds of the Hare Krishna mantra.

Namaste.

Please note that no one force you to follow all the rules.That's only a business of your.You are free to chant only 1 round of the Hare Krishna mantra in a day.No Krishna's devote will force you to chant more round.
Every one is welcomed to Krishna Consciousness,no matter what rules he follows.

Hare Krishna,
Bhakta Orlando.

kd gupta
02 September 2009, 01:19 PM
Why the word consciousness…..
There is a shloka in starting of gita…
Pashyetam….Drupadputren…..
Why Krsn engaged Drupadputra [ dhrashtdumna ] in arranging the army ?
Dhrashtdumna was determined to kill Drona, as Drona has insulted the Drupad , therefore it was sufficient reason to instigate Guru Drona to fight against his pandu pupils .

bhaktajan
03 September 2009, 12:23 PM
This is all so cute!

"gramya-Katha" [village talk]:

This place is just not a temple.
Oh, don't go to the Ganesh mandir, they don't do it right over there.
I would never go to the ISKCON temple. All they are concerned about is converting you.
A temple isn't a temple unless it has a Venkateshwara.
We started our own temple because as Fijians, the Brahmans didn't treat us well.
The priest has poor Sanskrit so I won't go there.
White people don't belong.
What? You can't bring food from home?
You mean there is somewhat of an unofficial dress code?
You have to drive so far, and they don't give us any say, so we just started our own temple.
I won't go there because everyone talks Hindi and I don't understand.
I won't go there because everyone talks Tamil and I don't understand.

grames
07 September 2009, 07:39 AM
Lord Krishna says of Rudra

tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham

Therefore, I worship Rudra first as my own Self.


Lord Krishna also says:

yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu
rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam
loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu

Whoever knows him, knows me. Whoever follows him, follows me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two Gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is One only who is worshipped.


Just some excerpts.... FYI&E

Mahabharata, Shanti Parva (12.328.5 onwards, dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna):


brAhme rAtrikShaye prApte tasya hy amitatejasaH prasAdAtprAdurabhavatpadmaM padmanibhekShaNa tatra brahmA samabhavatsa tasyaiva prasAdajaH


In the brahma muhurta, at the end of the night, due to the mercy of the extremely brilliant Lord, a lotus emerged from His navel and in that lotus, Brahma was born, ofcourse, due to His grace.


ahnaH kShaye lalAtAchcha suto devasya vai tathA krodhAviShTasya sa~njaGYe rudraH saMhAra kArakaH etau dvau vibudhashreShThau prasAdakrodhajau smR^itau


At the end of the day, the Lord [present as antaryAmi of Brahma *] created Rudra out of krodha-guna, to enable him to be the 'samhara-karta'. Thus, these two 'fine-among-wise', Brahma and Rudra, are known to have been born out of grace and anger respectively.

* This interpretation is necessary because in the later sections of Moksadharma, Brahma addresses Rudra as a son.


tadAdeshita panthAnau sR^iShTi saMhAra kArakau nimittamAtraM tAvatra sarvaprAni varapradau


Thus, they carry out the instructed tasks of creation and destruction. However, they, the givers of boons to all the creatures, are just the agents.


kapardI jatilo mundaH shmashAnagR^ihasevakaH ugravratadharo rudro yogI tripuradAruNaH dakShakratuharashchaiva bhaga netraharastathA


[Rudra has] braided hair with knot of an ascetic and rest of the head bald. He dwells in the home of graveyard, steadfast on vigorous penance as a yogi. He is ferocious to Tripurasuras, destroyed Daksayajna and took away the eyes of Bhaga.


nArAyaNAtmako GYeyaH pANDaveya yuge yuge

O Arjuna, know that in every yuga, Rudra is 'nArAyaNAtmaka'. (This phrase can mean: one whose indweller is Narayana, one who is always immersed in Narayana.)


tasmin hi pUjyamAne vai devadeve maheshvare sampUjito bhavetpArtha devo nArAyaNaH prabhuH


It is the Lord, the prabhu, the Narayana *IN* Maheshvara (the worshipable, the lord of the devas), who is actually worshiped.


ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH


O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way (i.e., worshiping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all - this is my opinion.


mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham

Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.


yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu


Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped.


na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA


O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.


na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham


Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra.


Lord being engaged in duty...

BG 3.21 - 3.23


yad yad acarati sresthas
tat tad evetaro janah
sa yat pramanam kurute
lokas tad anuvartate


na me parthasti kartavyam
trisu lokesu kincana
nanavaptam avaptavyam
varta eva ca karmani


yadi hy aham na varteyam
jatu karmany atandritah
mama vartmanuvartante
manusyah partha sarvasah



Whatever action is performed by a great man, common men follow in his footsteps. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues.
O son of Prtha, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I need to obtain anything--and yet I am engaged in work.
For, if I did not engage in work, O Partha, certainly all men would follow My path.

atanu
15 October 2009, 12:50 AM
Just some excerpts.... FYI&E

ahamAtmA hi lokAnAM vishvAnAM pANDunandana tasmAdAtmAnamevAgre rudraM sampUjayAmyaham yadyahaM nArchayeyaM vai IshAnaM varadaM shivam AtmAnaM nArchayetkashchiditi me bhAvitaM manaH


O son of Pandu, I am, indeed, the Atma, the indweller of this universe and the worlds. Therefore, I worship myself first, even when I worship Rudra. If I did not worship Rudra, the bestower of boons, in such a way (i.e., worshiping the indwelling Lord first), some would not worship Me, the indwelling Lord, at all - this is my opinion.



mayA pramANaM hi kR^itaM lokaH samanuvartate pramAnAni hi pUjyAni tatastaM pUjayAmyaham


Whatever I follow and give due worth as a pramaNa, the world follows that. Such pramanas have to be duly followed; therefore I follow them.



yastaM vetti sa mAM vetti yo.anu taM sa hi mAm anu rudro nArAyaNashchaiva sattvamekaM dvidhAkR^itam loke charati kaunteya vyakti sthaM sarvakarmasu


Whoever knows him, knows Me. Whoever follows him, follows Me. (Though) the world, in all its actions, worships two gods, Rudra and Narayana, it is actually one only who is worshiped.



na hi me kenachid deyo varaH pANDavanandana iti sa~ncintya manasA purANaM vishvamIshvaram putrArthaM ArAdhitavAn AtmAnaM aham AtmanA


O Son of Pandu, there is, of course, nobody who can grant Me boons. Knowing that well, I worhip Myself, Who am the beginningless and universal power, known as Sarveshvara, for the sake of getting sons.


na hi viShNuH pranamati kasmai chidvibudhAya tu R^ita AtmAnameveti tato rudraM bhajAmyaham

Indeed Vishnu does not bow to any one and [even when He bows to Himself], for what sake, but for the sake of showing the path to the wise. Therefore, it is the truth that I worship myself even when I worship Rudra.

Namaste grames,

Shruti teaches us the following.

Brihadaraynaka Upanishad

katame rudrA iti |
dasheme purushhe prANA
AtmaikAdashas

te yadA.asmAchchharIrAnmartyAdutkrAmanty
atha rodayanti
tadyadrodayanti
tasmAdrudrA iti || 4 ||

III-ix-4: ‘Which are the Rudras ?’ ‘The ten organs in the human body, with the prana as the tenth and the atma as the eleventh. When they depart from this mortal body, they make (one’s relatives) weep. Because they then make them weep, therefore they are called Rudras.’

--------------------------------

WE know that the Shruti decalres that the ekadasha Rudra is the indwelling Atman. Those who study Smriti, Purana, and Itihasa in line with Shruti do not need to bend any interpretation. We do not consider Rudra to be an isolated person but as the full fabric.

I am not going into interpolations and inconsistencies in your translation at all but I am agreeing to your full presentation. Therefrom two points are clear:


Shri Krishna worships his own Self and to do so He worships Rudra. (That is what Brihadaraynaka also teaches when it says the eleventh Rudra is the Atma).
Shri Krishna need not worship, since He is the Atman, but He does it as an example for the world.What a beautiful teaching. May all follow the example.

Om Namah Shivaya

Khatri
16 October 2009, 04:48 PM
Shri Krishna need not worship, since He is the Atman, but He does it as an example for the world.


What world?