View Full Version : Lord Krishna predicts a new Dharmic Golden Age

30 July 2012, 10:17 PM

30 July 2012, 11:31 PM
Namaste Omkara

This gentleman has a very nice voice with lots of realization in it. I notice his tilaka, which is Vaishnava.

“Culture of death” (20th Century) – this was sort of a happy surprise to see, in that so many of my friends (and myself as well, not to toot my own "horn") have been saying that what we see around us, within popular culture, and now especially in modern politicized Islamic Jihadist agenda (Kalifat movement and various offspins) of which many of us have been discussing and warning about literally for decades and adamant before 911 and leading up to 911 which many of my friends were predicting would happen but only few politicians in the US would listen and then… it happened.

But this “culture of death” is spot on, this is the exact term very good friends of mine have used often, and not just the term “culture of death” but the term “worship of death” and society becoming a “cult of death”.

“Spirituality itself will form the very core of civilization itself in the” --- (future …celebration of life and who we are ultimately, spirit, spirituality in the sense of being distinct from “religion”).

A long time ago I recall listening to a very adept Vaishnava Teacher back in the early 1980s (note - He was not famous, not like Gurus we have met from both India and the West, and I am not referencing A. C. Bhaktivendanta Prabhupada, just to clarify this was a Western-born "Spiritual Teacher") who was very much expressing the same point of view including the discussion of Dharma.

However, his conclusion was different from what was presented in this very interesting and very enlightened video.

His viewpoint was that spirituality as a core of civilization was not in the “near future”. In fact, something very bad is coming for most human beings in the near future do extreme attachment to instant pleasure. As the attachment grows more and more, and as industry, science, drugs and technology will be able to actually deliver such “instant pleasure” faster, and ever more faster, but will never be able to actually satisfy, then just like very spoiled children the expectation for instant gratification will drive instant anger and even extreme deviant and violent behavior from the “spoiled child” if “Disneyland” is not immediately delivered, and ever variations of such “instant gratification” must always be forthcoming, each one “new” from the previous vice. This is called variation.

But the only variation that can come from those in the bodily concept is variations of death. And unexpected to the world, instead of a more unified “language” across all peoples of the world as an outcome of “industrial and technological expansion and communications”, humans will become possessed into delving into such materialistic “worlds” that rest on top of false material “toys and gadgets” each of which will demand the participant to learn and become fluent in a strange language of that fixation. And so, the end result will be many, many “languages” and one “tribe” will not be able to communicate with another, which will only add more to the acceleration towards “some very real trouble”.

Some of this was put to print by a very simple printing press – I was given a copy and I believe I still have a copy of it somewhere in my vast collection of “boxes”. He certainly was very interesting. His predictions were very impressive. He said that real and true gratification is more than the common idea of the word “gratification”, and that only Deva can be both One answer and also provide unlimited variation of a purposeful means. And while this was an elevated state, that the best way for everyone in general to get towards the better path is not as many expect, that in fact he viewed “religion” in ways a means to the solution – that things must be kept very obvious and “simple” because it will reach a point where people in general will not be able to deal with the materialistic based changes that will start to chock them, demand more of their time, even turn against them as tools in the hands of demon like leaders who obtain power simply by promises of instant gratification which not only they will not deliver, but that they are fully aware that not even one promise is even possible of ever being delivered when all are takers and none are givers. The lies they will, and do, speak, are only a means to their own safety (and power) for their own family but even then, they know very well that their own safety will likely and surely collapse around them.

He termed this “the thin veil of civilization”. He did not see any such spiritual civilization in the near future at all, and nor did he see that explanations of such will lead to the best end of result, that actually the basic method at this time is to remain focused on the basics, which he called “religion” and which he fully explained is a more simple understanding and not as elevated as spirituality.

Yes, the downside to technology does not mean that the obvious upside of technology is there. That, for example, as we see today the internet as being a means to bring out and surround others with Dharma – of course he didn’t speak of the internet but of “communications by technology”. Which is good. And which should be utilized when it is obvious to do so.

But he was not so optimistic about the near future (e.g. the next 50 years).

He also warned back then something that I think is very possible.

He spoke of a conflict with Islam. And he said that they will reach a point when the world is on edge. At that point they will do something, that actually they have attempted in the past and will attempt again, only this time they will use “industry, science and technology” as part of the “magic act”.

They will orchestrate a “fake Mahdi event”. They will orchestrate a “fake miracle event”. Both will be designed to take already heightened submission and fanaticism with these elements of Islam to an extreme state. The very ones who are suppose to bring the words and faith of Islam itself will be the very ones fully, and knowingly, assisting to foment the “fake Mahdi” and “fake miracle”, and they will have no issue in knowingly participating in the “great lie”. Because they believe the “end justifies the means”.

I want to point out, nothing said here is what is my belief. I believe in Hinduism. I turn to the things that make my world a better place, and center me to the true Dharma – and that is the obvious things such as temple, songs and chants to God, Deva, Devi, to turn to Mahadeva as a Father and Great God., and to listen to the devotees of the same and to the yogis, Guru, the Saints. I do not know who is correct, the one who spoke a long time ago from way back then, and the one I see in the video today. But thank you for sharing this! I found much of the spoken word in that video as very rewarding.

And I do not think that you should be hesitant to share such a video, either. You have a lot of very important things to share. I noticed, Prabhupad was mentioned in this talk, "Bharat verses" (the Western World). That he said in the future the context will be "Bharat verses America", that the future is fated by something. And that something is that "Bharat was like a lame man, a man who cannot walk. American is like a blind man, a man who cannot see." The blindness was the maya of what we call today "technology" and consumerism. But that one day, the lame man will climb on the back of the blind man. And then together, something great can happen, they are going to help each other.

But it will be in the future. That is a very comforting promise if it comes true.

Today I think of Muruga, and the Vel He holds.

31 July 2012, 12:19 AM
To members of hdf-what are your thoughts on the future of sanatana dharma in the coming decades?

01 August 2012, 03:10 PM
Namaste, this person is Frank Morales aka "Sri Dharma Pravartaka Acharya." He says some smart things and has criticized Neo-Hinduism quite publicly in the past. Having said that, he and his followers have persistently been campaigning to get him name recognition on the internet for the last 10 years that I can recall. I suspect that he was once an ISKCON devotee, and I later came to understand that he had changed his views and had embraced some views of Sri Vaishnavism. For the most part, he seems interested in projecting himself as someone who discusses sanatana-dharma in a manner that is independent of other sampradayas.

Regarding this view of a "coming golden age," it comes from an ISKCON belief, supposedly based on the Brahma-Vaivarta Purana, that says that we are going to have 10,000 years in Kali Yuga that will be just like Satya Yuga before which Kali Yuga returns in full force. That sounds great, but I never really checked those references to see if that's what they really said. I don't really understand why any mumukshus really need to hear predictions about this world's future in the first place.

01 August 2012, 03:15 PM

Out of curiosity, I checked his biography at www.dharmacentral.com (http://www.dharmacentral.com). It appears he was initiated by B.R. Sridhar Swami. So basically, he is a Gaudiya Vaishnava by discipline. That doesn't mean of course, that his views represent orthodox Vaishnavism. I notice that he has a YouTube video out referring to Jesus as a "dharma acharya." I'll just stop right now...

01 August 2012, 03:23 PM
His website claims that he is an initiated Srivaishnava
Note-I have not independently verified this.

As to the Brahmavairata Purana Quote,I have my own doubts.This prediction is indeed made,but it is also said that the ganga devi will 'leave the earth' in 5000 years,which it obviously has'nt.Maybe it means that Ganga will lose its sacred status.The translation is not very clear.But then brahmavairata is said to deal with events of a different kalpa than ours,so maybe it could be attributed to that.

Btw,his article on radical universalism is a must-read for every hindu.
His articles on his website seem to he well written and traditional presentations of vishishtadvaita,in my assesment(correct me if I am wrong on this)

01 August 2012, 03:34 PM
I did not watch the jesus video,but he has written an article on his website defebding the video in which he says that he was trying to present dharmic teachibgs to christians through a medium they would relate to.I generally shy away from articles that link abrahamic faiths to hinduism(though gnostic,kabbalistic and sufi teachings do fome quite close to sanatana dharma).Just today a hindu has posted a comment on the abrahamic forums to the effect that so mqny ppl practise islam and he finds it unpalatable that the lord would not shower his grace on them.Basucalky saying "so many ppl cannot be wrong to practice islam".It is sad to see such attitudes among hindus.For some reason the abrahamic forum is clised for posting and so I could nit respond.Do check it out if you want to have a laugh.Its on the thread "an islam song i love"

01 August 2012, 03:44 PM
He says he is a srivaishnava in his article on ISKCON.

I have heard that B.R. Sridhara Swami was a Gaudiya.But I had assumed that he had been initiated by a different person of the same name.Hmmm.......makes no sense whatsoever to me.

01 August 2012, 03:48 PM
He clearly identifies Shriman Narayana aa tge supreme being and calls Sri Krishna an incarnation of God.No references to Caitanya on his website either.Doesnt seem to be Gaudiya,whatever he is.

01 August 2012, 03:51 PM
He is kind of a mixed bag, frankly. His tilak and initiating guru are clearly Gaudiya. His preaching techniques sound like they were imported from ISKCON, minus the Chaitanya references. I don't know in what sense he claims to be a Sri Vaishnava. On his website, it mentions that he gives sacred thread initiation to women, but Sri Vaishnavas do not practice that. I mostly find it obnoxious that his followers are constantly spamming the internet with his writings, and claiming that he is "recognized all over the world" as an "authentic" teacher of sanatana-dharma.

But, I do agree that his article on radical universalism is a good one that is a must-read for everyone here.

01 August 2012, 04:47 PM

Why is this in the 'Scriptures' section of HDF?

sri sri sri sri swami satayanandagiri maharaj ji

01 August 2012, 05:45 PM

Redical universalism was discussed here

And here,

The Sword of Kali
Reply to "A Philosophical Critique of Radical Universalism"
by Chittaranjan Naik


Jai Shree Krishna

01 August 2012, 07:10 PM
We need to be careful when we paint everyone with a broad stroke.

I am NOT a universalist , and my belief is in SD .I do not think that Muhammad or Buddha or Mahavir ever showed the true path for salvation (moksa) , or ever explained the nature of the relationship between Brahman and the manifestations.

But I have different take on Jesus. Reading thru Gnostic literature & reading the direct quotes attributed to him in testaments, it is clear to me that he was preaching advaita. ‘I am the way and the light’ is a direct challenge to the deity of Jehovah , and comes close to ‘aham Bramamsi’ . Papal councils & even Orthodoxy routinely edited the contents that they were uncomfortable with and we may be missing a lot in Bible. He was talking to an audience who were steeped in Jewish traditions , and they could have missed quiet a lot of SD like concepts put forth to them , or they could have been edited out.

If someone claims the Jesus was an acharya , I wont categorize him as a universalist. It is an irony that the religion that is practiced as Christianity is an invention of Rome & its offshoots , and is not what Jesus preached – and definitely doesn’t lead to moksha.

01 August 2012, 10:30 PM
Namaste satay,
I put it in scriptures since it dealt with a prophecy made in scripture.Please move it to the appropriate thread if you feel like.

To seeker:I would say that in the last century itself thete have been many hindu saints greater tgan hesus.Then why bothet about him?

To satay,why has thexabrahamic forum been closed?

To Ganeshprasad,does this mean you agree all religions are the same?What is your stand on this?Di you want me to rebut the criticism to frank morales essay you have posted?I am ready to do so.

01 August 2012, 10:35 PM
If someone comes on a hindu forum and posts-ram and allah are the same as was said in the abrahamic forum,I find it deeply offensive.I am sure most here would feel the same.

To seeker-please do not interpret other's scriptures for them.It is generally accepted by historians that the gnostic gospel of thomas us more authentic and accurate in representing the beleifs of jesus.But it is a gnistic scripture and gnostic doctrine is closer to bheda abheda rather than advaita.Do not twist the words of the gnostic gospels to suit your beleif.Gnosticism is NOT advaita.

They believe the world was real,and created by an evil demiurge who eas other than god.They also view matter as intrinsically evil.As an advaitin,would you agree to this?

Suppose jesus did teach advaita.So what?Does a hindu NEED jesus?Do we not have much greater saints and teachers within our iwn tradition?

02 August 2012, 01:53 AM
Pardon typos. All this is being typed on a cellphone.

02 August 2012, 05:05 AM
Pranam Omkara and all

I have not offered my view on here, my views are well known I don't need to rehash them but since you ask, no i am not a universalist.

Feel free to rebutt the rebuttal

Jai Shree Krishna

02 August 2012, 09:42 AM
If someone comes on a hindu forum and posts-ram and allah are the same as was said in the abrahamic forum,I find it deeply offensive.I am sure most here would feel the same.

Namaste Omkaraji,

It was I who posted the above. No, I am not a saint who envisioned the above and posted it as per my whims and fancies. I have read the story of sant Kabirdas and of Sri Madhwacharya who have said the same.

Madhwacharya: http://www.bharatadesam.com/people/madhwacharya.php (Read para which says 'Your god is my god').

In the thread 'Islam song I love' I posted some important questions, as to why Sriman Narayana for instance, forsake some noble souls of Islam that he should abandon them to a religion that is not true, if that is really the case?

As for sentiments of most people in this forum, I cannot comment on that, it may be religious supremacy or dislike stemming from Muslim tyranny on Indian soil and 9/11. But what I posted was on the religion itself as practiced by millions, not on what its present state is. Therefore if most people disagree with me, I can only quote the 2 saints whom I immensely believe than these people who disagree with me, who have not had their spiritual vision.



02 August 2012, 09:49 AM
As per my own views,

I am a staunch devotee of Sriman Narayana (Lord Rama and Lakshmi Narasimha to be specific),

I believe Sanathana Dharma will surely help one attain crown emancipation or complete self-realization,

but I also believe other religions are also true, where spiritual ascension is possible but not complete liberation and that for complete liberation or 'jeevan-mukti', one needs to be born in Hinduism.

Thus I believe in every religion.

02 August 2012, 10:39 AM

I know I shouldn't take the bait but I couldn't help it.

Thus I believe in every religion.

This is a contradiction in terms. 'Every religion' is not the same e.g. the most popular religion of the day Christianity oposses Islam and vice verca, they oppose everything else. Thus if you say I believe in all religions it is a contradiction.

Probably what you meant to say is that you respect all other religions. This is a logical position most hindus take. There is nothing wrong in respecting other religions.

02 August 2012, 11:05 AM
Namaste Satayji,

Yes, the better term would have been 'respect for every religion'. Thanks for the correction.

To Omkaraji:

I believe the pride of every Hindu in Hinduism is that whereas other religions give the option of walking half-way through a long and rocky road up the spirituality hill and end midway, Hinduism offers the option of taking a bus and reaching the top.

The only point I was trying to make is that the midway walk through the rocky path need not be totally untrue for that matter.:)

02 August 2012, 12:52 PM

.....whereas other religions give the option of walking half-way through a long and rocky road up the spirituality hill and end midway, Hinduism offers the option of taking a bus and reaching the top.
Why is this assumption being made that some 'thought processes', which are claimed to be 'religions' by some people, even take you half way on the spirituality hill? Why do we discount the fact that some merely help you to circumambulate the base of the spiritual hill without any rise in your spiritual level? Why is this fascination with, oh so many follow this blind path, so it must have some goodness in it? Why is this indirect insinuation that some people have 'hate' in their minds? Is being charitable to other 'thought processes' a self serving way of looking benevolent, and therefore more spiritually evolved? Should truth be forsaken in the interest of window dressing? Does a condescending attitude towards fellow seekers elevate a person's spirituality quotient? Do 'real awakened' souls go around the digital world making mushy posts?


02 August 2012, 07:59 PM

Why do we discount the fact that some merely help you to circumambulate the base of the spiritual hill without any rise in your spiritual level? Why is this fascination with, oh so many follow this blind path, so it must have some goodness in it?

Namaste Believer,

Let us not forget there are many Muslims that have served our Hindu dieties with devotion. Even recently I read about a Muslim devotee who read the entire Bhagavad Gita and translates that into some Muslim language... read it at Dinamalar.com. Given that, it is proven there are lots of Muslims who are good, devoted at heart... So why do not you answer the questions, "Why would Sriman Narayana abandon such souls into an untrue religion?".

Secondly, I am not spiritually evolved nor am I trying to prove myself as one, I am just perceiving terms such as 'Non-caste', 'mleccha', etc. and I am just wondering whether they will not offend the readers who belong to such categories and I wonder why it should really be so... because this is a 'Hindu' forum?:p

02 August 2012, 11:10 PM
A lot of interesting points have been raised here,and I plan to write a very detailed reply soon.For now,I will make a few concise points for lack of time.

Aspirant 01,I agree with much of the position you have adopted in later posts,with one caveat-I respect the right of followers of thise faiths to beleive what they do-a respect that is sadly not reciprocated.I have no respect whatsoever for those belief systems as such.

However,your revised position contradicts the position you have taken earlier,that lord vishnu=allah.In that case you cannot also say that moksha is possibke only within hinduism as if vishnu=allah,worshipping allah should also grant liberation.Since allah says in the quran that accepting islan will grant liberation,let us all convert to islam then....why bother with hinduism and its cimplicated philosophy?If all gods are the sane,why not select the easurst path?
Let us explore this idea further.Do you then beleive the quran to be a revealed scripture?
Do you realize in hiw many different places it contradict what the vedas say?If Why would god conradict himself?

03 August 2012, 07:47 AM

Probably I am not in a position to answer all your questions - my understanding of what I said in this thread comes in as a response to 'Ram = Allah' argument, and partially because I am a member of some other Hindu fora for long and this is what I have gleaned from reading material posted thereof.

All I can say is that, it is my understanding that liberation is possible only in Hinduism because other religions participate in Athma-Hathya - soul killing for one's personal desire/wishes.

It is said in Bhagawad Gita, one ascends to a certain level of spirituality out of one's efforts/strifes, and then in subsequent births, given high births to preserve that level of consciousness he/she has already attained, and given ascension to higher states out of fortunate exposure and guidance.

My understanding is that Islam people have a certain amount of karma that one has to dispense-off via strict disciplines - thus the focus is on discipline - even the verses of Quran are said to pacify 'Rahu' - the personification of manifest desires - and thus is a religion that gives initial spiritual ascension with efforts and practice but owing to soul-killing, there are no lokas or worlds for liberated souls to exist and there is no final emancipation granted thereof.

This is my understanding.

03 August 2012, 10:08 AM
If someone comes on a hindu forum and posts-ram and allah are the same as was said in the abrahamic forum,I find it deeply offensive.I am sure most here would feel the same.

To seeker-please do not interpret other's scriptures for them.It is generally accepted by historians that the gnostic gospel of thomas us more authentic and accurate in representing the beleifs of jesus.But it is a gnistic scripture and gnostic doctrine is closer to bheda abheda rather than advaita.Do not twist the words of the gnostic gospels to suit your beleif.Gnosticism is NOT advaita.

They believe the world was real,and created by an evil demiurge who eas other than god.They also view matter as intrinsically evil.As an advaitin,would you agree to this?

Suppose jesus did teach advaita.So what?Does a hindu NEED jesus?Do we not have much greater saints and teachers within our iwn tradition?

Namaste Omkara Ji,

My beliefs are my own interpretations of various written work and I am not interpreting Gnostic literature for Christians.

That said , I dont think that Hindus need Jesus or Christianity - since we have seers that lived among us and were understood properly. On the contrary , those who are christians do need to look into SD to connect the words of Jesus to what he actually meant. It makes more sense that way. But I do not go around telling my belief to the christians I meet - I am not for that.

I also happen to believe that life exists in more places than the earth , and we have satya yuga in some of these places. In those places we will have quiet a large number of evolved beings - I wont frown upon them due to 'non invented here' syndrome. I also dont expect their preachings to be much different that what Upanishads tell us. Hope that explains my position on these things.

04 August 2012, 05:57 AM
Namaste Omkara

Actually thanks for sharing this, I was a little bored this evening so I decided to hunt down the web site associated with the video. And some of what was noted in regards to the speakers identity was a match, who apparently is a disciple of the Indian-born Swami Bhakti Rakshaka Sridhara. I noticed on the site there is a thriving Sanatana Dharma Forum, and though I am not sure if I accept or reject the authority and truth of the message I did notice an explanation of varna, caste et all that really connected with my Hindu experience and relations with Guru, Yogi, Swami, mystics, Bhaktas and so on both in the US and in India, so I went ahead and subscribed to their forum to take a look around. It might be rewarding, but I hope you do not mind that I did so being you were the one who gave light of this site in that I am not sure if you approve of them or not, I have never heard of them before, or if I did it was probably only a name or society I may have only glanced at by chance.

I just subscribed to their forum today, and decided to use my same "handle" I use on this forum "ShivaFan". Actually I am not a big proponent of using handles instead of real names, but the only reason I did was because some other respected Hindu (Vaishnav based) society was sort of really wanting to get a hold of me but it wasn't a perfect alignment for me to do so at this time, though I have admirable feelings for them. And in regards to this site discovery, it might be fun to explore it a bit.

Om Namah Sivaya

06 August 2012, 02:45 AM
Namaste Seeker,
The point I was making is that you are misinterpreting the gnostic scriptures.The teach simultaneous sameness and difference between god and the soul,and not monistic panentheism as advaita does.Any text must be interpreted to say what its authors intended to say,and the authors of the gospel of thomas were gnostics who did not beleive in monism.I'd suggest you go over to wikipedia and read the article on gnosticism to understand what jesus is actually saying.

I do not frown on any philosophy because it was 'not invented here'.The fact that dharma took such strong root in India is a matter of historical circumstance.Indeed the strongest argument in favour of SD is that mystics across the world have experienced the same truths independently.Examples include Kabbalah,Sufism,Gnosticism,Pythagoreanism,Neoplatonism,Taoism,Confucianism and even Native American and African tribal religions like Yoruba.
To Aspirant 01, being a good person alone is not a qualification for moksha.Virtuous people of all religions are rewarded appropriately and vice versa through the mechanism of karma.However,only hinduism has developed a systematic and proven method to acheive moksha,as attested by the examples of numerous saints and sages.One can acheive moksha by following their example.

06 August 2012, 06:05 PM
I used to frequent this guy's Youtube channel for a while. At times I thought he had some good things to say but later on decided it was more of the same, and more of the same.... For a guy who wants to change the world, his movement seems fairly vague and, with all due respect, ineffectual.

06 August 2012, 08:03 PM
Actually, it kind of looks like their forum isn't active anymore. It looks like the most recent posting was back in 2011. My registration still hasn't been fully enabled, as if no one is minding the site. I sent them an email a few days ago to inquire if the forum is active, but there has been no response. It looks like their society is an outreach or seeking adherents but it also looks like no one is home.
Om Namah Sivaya

15 September 2012, 10:22 AM
I tracked down the verses of the prophecy