Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Some questions on HK

  1. #1

    Some questions on HK

    Dear All,
    Although attracted to the good bhakti side and sankirtana of the HareKrishnas and their spreading the glory of Lord Krishna in the west, I have always had questions on the double standards proudly guarded and criticism of other schools rampant in it. I would like to paste a conversation that was going towards the HK, Vivekananda criticism. I had posed certain questions, that I thought would be answered. But as the discussion saw the HK side getting weaker for their every other sampradaya bashing, the posts were abruptly removed (not the first time) by the pro HK administrators. And neither does this match their forum policies. This is an internal policy followed by all HKs.
    Here it goes:





    Username: Guruvani
    Senior Member
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: USA
    Posts: 1,631



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guestabc
    Guruvani,

    I will let you continue on your cruise in wonderland.

    But before that, out of frank curiosity, can you define "religious tolerance" in about 25 words or lesser for the benefit of myself and other interested parties? Since HKs vehemently deny accusations of intolerance, it makes me wonder if they do not understand the concept of tolerance.

    In fact, this is a good time to tap the collective wisdom of the HK community on this forum. I invite all HKs to define "religious intolerance". Rest assured, I will not start an argument and will not disagree with your definition. This is simply out of curiosity and nothing else; just curious to know how Vivekananda bashing and Kundalini bashing do not qualify as intolerance.

    Om

    Bhakti Caru Swami has recalled:

    Quote:
    Prabhupada started to criticise Ramakrishna and Vivekananda. He started to tell me how they actually have destroyed whole Bengali culture and the spiritual life of Bengal. It is because of their wrong propaganda that Mahaprabhus teachings have been covered over and the Bengalis today are not really so well acquainted with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and his teachings, what to speak of recognising Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Like all the Bengalis have become so animate by Ramakrishna and Vivekananda who actually have nothing to say, they have no spiritual message whatsoever. Ramakrishna is just an illiterate pujari and Vivekananda was just a ruffian. Thats how Srila Prabhupada expressed, identifying those two so-called spiritual personalities. I got the message and I got the message that how Prabhupada wanted that their position must be smashed and Chaitanya Mahaprabhus glories must be established.


    __________________

    May the Supreme Lord who is known as the son of Srimati Saci-devi be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation has ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant mellow of devotional service, the mellow of conjugal love.


    Yesterday, 03:05 PM #22



    Username: Guruvani
    Senior Member
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: USA
    Posts: 1,631



    Famous quote of Vivekananda:

    Quote:
    Even he who has seen only a spook is more spiritual than book-learned pundits.

    So, Vivekananda believed that a person who sees a ghost is more learned than the Vedic scholars.

    DUH.....

    I guess he learned that from some illiterate pujari?

    __________________

    May the Supreme Lord who is known as the son of Srimati Saci-devi be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation has ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant mellow of devotional service, the mellow of conjugal love.


    Yesterday, 03:19 PM #23

    Username: Beggar
    Member
    Join Date: Mar 2006
    Posts: 308

    Mortification

    One time when he was only in the Gaudiya Math for a few years one of Srila Sridhar Maharaja's college friends came to see him at a math. His friend asked him, "You have been wearing these red rags now for several years now, what have you learned?" Srila Sridhar Maharaja replied, "I have learned that everything that Vivekananda and Rama Krsna has taught is wrong". His friend was "mortified" and immediately left the math.



    Yesterday, 03:20 PM #24

    Guestabc
    Posts: n/a
    here it is...

    Bhakti Caru Swami says
    Quote:
    I got the message and I got the message that how Prabhupada wanted that their position must be smashed and Chaitanya Mahaprabhus glories must be established

    Very advanced thinking. In other words, I was wrong when I said HKs deny they are intolerant. Apparently, they are aware of their intolerance and are quite brazen about it. Hererafter if some HK denies his intolerance, I can point him to this message.

    Guruvani says
    Quote:
    So, Vivekananda believed that a person who sees a ghost is more learned than the Vedic scholars.

    DUH.....

    I guess he learned that from some illiterate pujari?

    And now per the supreme saint Prabhupada's message to smash another system, you as a faithful HK are engaging in Vivekananda and Kundalini bashing. I got it. Thanks for the response.

    Om



    Yesterday, 03:34 PM #25



    Username: suchandra
    Member
    Join Date: May 2005
    Location: Europe
    Posts: 418



    Obviously Vivekananda was such a mundane character that all people just liked him and therefore he could teach whatever he wanted, people accepted everything from him. He must have a nice situation in this life however his future was surely samsara - for spiritually misleading people the most heavy karmas are waiting.



    __________________
    "Many waterpots were filled with scented water for drinking, and Lord ?r? Gop?la, who had been hungry for many days, ate everything offered to Him." CC Madhya 4.76


    Yesterday, 03:46 PM #26

    Guestabc
    Posts: n/a
    --

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by suchandra
    Obviously Vivekananda was such a mundane character that all people just liked him and therefore he could teach whatever he wanted, people accepted everything from him. He must have a nice situation in this life however his future was surely samsara - for spiritually misleading people the most heavy karmas are waiting.

    Or...

    Obviously Prabhupada was such a mundane character that all people just liked him and therefore he could teach whatever he wanted, people accepted everything from him. He must have a nice situation in this life however his future was surely samsara - for spiritually misleading people the most heavy karmas are waiting.

    Om



    Today, 02:46 AM #27

    Username: niranjan
    Junior Member
    Join Date: Jan 2007
    Posts: 36

    vivekananda

    <....e claim that Vivekananda was somehow a devotee of Krishna is not supported by any of his own works, writings or teachings.

    Vivekananda was an impersonalist.>>


    Each soul is potentially divine.The goal is to manifest this divine nature within by controlling nature, external and internal.
    Do this either by work or worship or psychic control, or philosophy- by one or more, or all of these- and be free.
    This is the whole of religion. Doctrines or dogmas, or rituals or books,or temples or forms, are but secondary details.
    --Swami Vivekananda


    Swami Vivekananda , with respect to this above quote of his, himself practiced Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga and Karma Yoga, even though he was basically a Jnana Yogi. He saw no contradiction in this. His spiritual master, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa , himself was a devotee of Krishna and a Jnana Yogi. It is thus natural that Vivekananda was an impersonalist and a devotee of Krishna as well. This is the same with Adi Shankaracharya, who was an impersonalist , and a devotee of Krishna as well.




    Even he who has seen only a spook is more spiritual than book-learned pundits.

    By this quote of his, it can be easily understood that Vivekananda, in his outspoken and charecterestic manner ,is disparaging mere book-learning and intellectual gymnastics , and stating that spiritual practice is more important than theoretical knowledge.



    Today, 05:34 AM #28

    y k
    Posts: n/a


    I once talked to an exalted GBC Maharaj and pin pointed to a concept of the percentages assigned to the "Supreme personalities of Godhead" (Vishnu, shiva) like only 87 percent of Krishna, 75 percent etc and expressed my wonder in the fact that since God is infinite, how wonderfully calculous are the gaudiyas in assigning this precise percentage to the infinite. He answered back by saying that even a little criticism of a devotee who is lovable to God is a great aparadha and that I should be afraid of it and afraid and be beware of even raising such questions.

    1. I wonder what happened to the aparadhas that go into merciless bashing of fellow lovers of God like Shri RamaKrishna Paramhansa and every other saint (non-gaudiya sampradaya) by Shri Prabhupada? Can we lavishly use the word 'Rascal' for other saints who don't fit the Gaudiya definition of worship? If The HK consider themselves as even humble than the blade of grass (as oer the instructions of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) and the servants of the servants of the servants of God, how can they allow this behavior? (Even if we suppose Shri Ramakrishna Paramhansa was an impersonalist, he still was a lover of God and very humble. I don't remember him calling anyone this rsacal, that rascal etc) This is question number one!

    The word impersonalist is pronounced by Iskcon devotees as some sort of hate-worthy perverted scum bag. "oh no! That @^%# is impersonalist!"

    2. Soul is a part of God and is pure in its origin. I would like the learned HK community, to shed some light on the 'personal FORM' of this soul. You do repeat the BG words of - size of ten thousandth (or whatever) part of the tip of a hair thing, but what is the form? I'd love to know that. This is the second important question.

    3. Also, in BG, Krishna showed his eternal universal form. And this form had every other form in it. So what is the real Krishna form? The one standing with a flute with a cow and gopies? Or the universal form? My third question.
    I'd like the servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of God to Please.. shed some light on this.

    Love,

    y k

    (P.S. ugh.. sorry the discussion is turning a bit away from the islamic terrorism thread. But since the questions are being discussed on Vevekananda and impersonalism, I feel this important.)


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by niranjan
    <....e claim that Vivekananda was somehow a devotee of Krishna is not supported by any of his own works, writings or teachings.

    Vivekananda was an impersonalist.>>


    Each soul is potentially divine.The goal is to manifest this divine nature within by controlling nature, external and internal.
    Do this either by work or worship or psychic control, or philosophy- by one or more, or all of these- and be free.
    This is the whole of religion. Doctrines or dogmas, or rituals or books,or temples or forms, are but secondary details.
    --Swami Vivekananda


    Swami Vivekananda , with respect to this above quote of his, himself practiced Bhakti Yoga, Raja Yoga and Karma Yoga, even though he was basically a Jnana Yogi. He saw no contradiction in this. His spiritual master, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa , himself was a devotee of Krishna and a Jnana Yogi. It is thus natural that Vivekananda was an impersonalist and a devotee of Krishna as well. This is the same with Adi Shankaracharya, who was an impersonalist , and a devotee of Krishna as well.




    Even he who has seen only a spook is more spiritual than book-learned pundits.

    By this quote of his, it can be easily understood that Vivekananda, in his outspoken and charecterestic manner ,is disparaging mere book-learning and intellectual gymnastics , and stating that spiritual practice is more important than theoretical knowledge.




    Today, 06:01 AM #29



    Username: Guruvani
    Senior Member
    Join Date: Jun 2003
    Location: USA
    Posts: 1,631



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by y k
    I once talked to an exalted GBC Maharaj and pin pointed to a concept of the percentages assigned to the "Supreme personalities of Godhead" (Vishnu, shiva) like only 87 percent of Krishna, 75 percent etc and expressed my wonder in the fact that since God is infinite, how wonderfully calculous are the gaudiyas in assigning this precise percentage to the infinite. He answered back by saying that even a little criticism of a devotee who is lovable to God is a great aparadha and that I should be afraid of it and afraid and be beware of even raising such questions.

    1. I wonder what happened to the aparadhas that go into merciless bashing of fellow lovers of God like Shri RamaKrishna Paramhansa and every other saint (non-gaudiya sampradaya) by Shri Prabhupada?

    (Jnanis are not "lovers of God". They reject the personal feature of God and advocate the impersonal brahman as supreme. How can you "love" a clear white light? Love is a feeling shared between persons. It is not a fascination with the clear white light of the brahman)

    Can we lavishly use the word 'Rascal' for other saints who don't fit the Gaudiya definition of worship? If The HK consider themselves as even humble than the blade of grass (as oer the instructions of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) and the servants of the servants of the servants of God, how can they allow this behavior? (Even if we suppose Shri Ramakrishna Paramhansa was an impersonalist, he still was a lover of God and very humble. I don't remember him calling anyone this rsacal, that rascal etc) This is question number one!
    The word impersonalist is pronounced by Iskcon devotees as some sort of hate-worthy perverted scum bag. "oh no! That @^%# is impersonalist!"

    (lavishly? Making one or two references to a nonsense philosopher as being a rascal is hardly "lavish". Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was very much against this impersonalist philosophy and he was critical of that way of thinking. All the followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu carry on that battle against the impersonalist philosophers.)


    2. Soul is a part of God and is pure in its origin. I would like the learned HK community, to shed some light on the 'personal FORM' of this soul. You do repeat the BG words of - size of ten thousandth (or whatever) part of the tip of a hair thing, but what is the form? I'd love to know that. This is the second important question.

    (the soul is only a spark of light in this world, but in the spiritual world the body of the soul is non-different than the soul. Just like this spark can have a material body in this world, it can have a spiritual body in the transcendental realm. The spiritual body is made of eternal knowledge and bliss.)

    3. Also, in BG, Krishna showed his eternal universal form. And this form had every other form in it. So what is the real Krishna form? The one standing with a flute with a cow and gopies? Or the universal form? My third question.
    I'd like the servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of God to Please.. shed some light on this.

    (The Universal Form of Krishna is not his eternal form. It is something only seen by a few rare souls in this material world. That is why it is called the Universal form, because it is composed of all the forms that he has in this material universe. In the spiritual world there is no universal form of the Lord as Arjuna saw on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra.)

    Love,

    y k

    (P.S. ugh.. sorry the discussion is turning a bit away from the islamic terrorism thread. But since the questions are being discussed on Vevekananda and impersonalism, I feel this important.)


    __________________

    May the Supreme Lord who is known as the son of Srimati Saci-devi be transcendentally situated in the innermost chambers of your heart. Resplendent with the radiance of molten gold, He has appeared in the Age of Kali by His causeless mercy to bestow what no incarnation has ever offered before: the most sublime and radiant mellow of devotional service, the mellow of conjugal love.


    Today, 06:05 AM #30

    y k
    Posts: n/a


    Here it is vital to understand the essence of his words, rather than just rephrasing them in a critically sharp tone.
    He emphasized the importance of practical knowledge, rather than just book licking.
    He came in a time, when the pandas were high-jacking the local innocent public on the basis of flowery scriptural texts and were exploiting them by their mis-interpretations. He taught the masses to believe in themselves and the spiritual strength that God gave everyone and rise above the exploitation of the scripture wielding pandas. That was a time, when there was a strong need of practical sadhna and recognizing our life's value and the purpose. Of course we need to serve and worship God, but there was a lot of expoitation behind that. Vivekananda rose above that. He was also the first pioneer to introduce the wonderful spiritual culture of India to the West at the congress of religions in Chicago. A culture that was not a monopoly of one particular sect, but richer in its experience and philosophy and opened the doors to the yoga of spirit, God and karma philosophy of the east to the west.

    As far as Ramakrishna's Paramhansa's being illiterate is concerned, then the much revered Gopis in the gaudiya tradition never went to any school.
    Why don't they call them illiterate? Just another example if double HK standards.
    OM ! (Krishna says in BG he's OM)
    Y K

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Famous quote of Vivekananda:

    So, Vivekananda believed that a person who sees a ghost is more learned than the Vedic scholars.

    DUH.....

    I guess he learned that from some illiterate pujari?




    Today, 07:00 AM #31

    y k
    Posts: n/a
    some ques/ans.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Originally Posted by y k

    1. I wonder what happened to the aparadhas that go into merciless bashing of fellow lovers of God like Shri RamaKrishna Paramhansa and every other saint (non-gaudiya sampradaya) by Shri Prabhupada?

    Guruvani: (Jnanis are not "lovers of God". They reject the personal feature of God and advocate the impersonal brahman as supreme. How can you "love" a clear white light? Love is a feeling shared between persons. It is not a fascination with the clear white light of the brahman)

    Well here we certainely see another double HK standard. I saw on a different thread that the bhaktas and Vedantins should make an enquiry.
    A Jnani is one who makes enquiry of GOD! It is his interest and love of God that he makes extensive inquiry of him adn wants to know and come closer to him! On the other hand do you propose that the so called "lovers" and bhaktas of God should not be gnanis and remain foolish starry eyed lovers only? If that is the case why does HK system propounds lectures after lectures churning out scriptural maze on devotees, rather than just love God?
    How can you love a clear white light is mocked by the HKs in the same manner just as once the western world mocked the HKs by saying how can you love a half Lion, ferocious as hell ripping apart someone's belly n taking out the intestines as your God. You must be satanists! That was the resonance that resounded in the HK court case back in the seventies. And it was because of the lack of understanding on the part of the western people, of the HK philosophy and its intricacies. The white light love mockery that the HKs have been enjoying, is being reflected in the same spirit and manner. umm.. talking about double standards. We have 'em all.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Y k: Can we lavishly use the word 'Rascal' for other saints who don't fit the Gaudiya definition of worship? If The HK consider themselves as even humble than the blade of grass (as oer the instructions of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) and the servants of the servants of the servants of God, how can they allow this behavior? (Even if we suppose Shri Ramakrishna Paramhansa was an impersonalist, he still was a lover of God and very humble. I don't remember him calling anyone this rsacal, that rascal etc) This is question number one!
    The word impersonalist is pronounced by Iskcon devotees as some sort of hate-worthy perverted scum bag. "oh no! That @^%# is impersonalist!"

    Guruvani: lavishly? Making one or two references to a nonsense philosopher as being a rascal is hardly "lavish". Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was very much against this impersonalist philosophy and he was critical of that way of thinking. All the followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu carry on that battle against the impersonalist philosophers.

    One or two references? These one or two references surfaced every now and then and everytime Shri Prabhupada mentioned any other saint apart from gaudiyas. That's how critical it is. Chaitanya was critical of impersonal philosophy doesn't mean it is not a path! Vivekananda was not strictly impersonal if he worshipped Krishna and kali!! What are you trying to say? Vivekananda worshipped personal forms too! But still you are trying to bash him!! The very agenda of carrying out a "battle" against all other lines of philosophies apart from their own is sick and full of hate! What happened to the see the soul and love them all verse of BG? Or is that only used in the discourse class? Besides I don't think HKs should feel any remorse if Prabhupada would be called similar names as you don't refrain from calling all other spiritual personalities as "nonesense, rascal" etc. Do I need to mention all most so called "Gurus" authorized and appointed by Sp fell off their positions! Was that not nonesense?


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    2. Soul is a part of God and is pure in its origin. I would like the learned HK community, to shed some light on the 'personal FORM' of this soul. You do repeat the BG words of - size of ten thousandth (or whatever) part of the tip of a hair thing, but what is the form? I'd love to know that. This is the second important question.

    (the soul is only a spark of light in this world, but in the spiritual world the body of the soul is non-different than the soul. Just like this spark can have a material body in this world, it can have a spiritual body in the transcendental realm. The spiritual body is made of eternal knowledge and bliss.)

    Your definitions of soul's "body" are nonesense! really. What is a soul's body? HKs don't have complete understanding of it. Nor do they have any means to see or experience it as the yogis do. They never make the inward journey through samadhi. All their activities are outward - prasadam, lectures, dancing, book distribution etc. (that's good too!).
    If it is a spark of light in this world, then you should understand the importance of this spark of light!!! Because of which you can think and do whatever you are doing - love and inquiry into the higher self. This spark has is the seat of paramatma in the gross material body.
    What is the form of Paramatma?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Y k: 3. Also, in BG, Krishna showed his eternal universal form. And this form had every other form in it. So what is the real Krishna form? The one standing with a flute with a cow and gopies? Or the universal form? My third question.
    I'd like the servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of God to Please.. shed some light on this.

    Guruvani: (The Universal Form of Krishna is not his eternal form. It is something only seen by a few rare souls in this material world. That is why it is called the Universal form, because it is composed of all the forms that he has in this material universe. In the spiritual world there is no universal form of the Lord as Arjuna saw on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra.)

    Do HK really understand the meaning of this universal form? Did Krishna show that all forms are his. And did he say in BG that through whichever form one worships him, he comes to the devotee in that form! He didn't say the HK painting form is only real and the others are not.
    Ok. So what is the form of the Lord Hari in the "spiritual world" then?



    Today, 07:07 AM #32

    y k
    Posts: n/a
    some ques/ans.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Originally Posted by y k

    1. I wonder what happened to the aparadhas that go into merciless bashing of fellow lovers of God like Shri RamaKrishna Paramhansa and every other saint (non-gaudiya sampradaya) by Shri Prabhupada?

    Guruvani: (Jnanis are not "lovers of God". They reject the personal feature of God and advocate the impersonal brahman as supreme. How can you "love" a clear white light? Love is a feeling shared between persons. It is not a fascination with the clear white light of the brahman)

    Well here we certainely see another double HK standard. I saw on a different thread that the bhaktas and Vedantins should make an enquiry.
    A Jnani is one who makes enquiry of GOD! It is his interest and love of God that he makes extensive inquiry of him adn wants to know and come closer to him! On the other hand do you propose that the so called "lovers" and bhaktas of God should not be gnanis and remain foolish starry eyed lovers only? If that is the case why does HK system propounds lectures after lectures churning out scriptural maze on devotees, rather than just love God?
    How can you love a clear white light is mocked by the HKs in the same manner just as once the western world mocked the HKs by saying how can you love a half Lion, ferocious as hell ripping apart someone's belly n taking out the intestines as your God. You must be satanists! That was the resonance that resounded in the HK court case back in the seventies. And it was because of the lack of understanding on the part of the western people, of the HK philosophy and its intricacies. The white light love mockery that the HKs have been enjoying, is being reflected in the same spirit and manner. umm.. talking about double standards. We have 'em all.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Y k: Can we lavishly use the word 'Rascal' for other saints who don't fit the Gaudiya definition of worship? If The HK consider themselves as even humble than the blade of grass (as oer the instructions of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) and the servants of the servants of the servants of God, how can they allow this behavior? (Even if we suppose Shri Ramakrishna Paramhansa was an impersonalist, he still was a lover of God and very humble. I don't remember him calling anyone this rsacal, that rascal etc) This is question number one!
    The word impersonalist is pronounced by Iskcon devotees as some sort of hate-worthy perverted scum bag. "oh no! That @^%# is impersonalist!"

    Guruvani: lavishly? Making one or two references to a nonsense philosopher as being a rascal is hardly "lavish". Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was very much against this impersonalist philosophy and he was critical of that way of thinking. All the followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu carry on that battle against the impersonalist philosophers.

    One or two references? These one or two references surfaced every now and then and everytime Shri Prabhupada mentioned any other saint apart from gaudiyas. That's how critical it is. Chaitanya was critical of impersonal philosophy doesn't mean it is not a path! Vivekananda was not strictly impersonal if he worshipped Krishna and kali!! What are you trying to say? Vivekananda worshipped personal forms too! But still you are trying to bash him!!
    aah.. finally we touch the topic! So the HKs have a BATTLE against agenda.
    Radical islamist also have a battle agenda against the kafirs! Do we see some similarity here? I think we are coming back close to the Islamic battle topic, as we hear that the followers of Sri Chaitanya also have a secret Battle agenda going on agains all other God loving philosopers, just because it looks diferent from them. Great!! Keep up the battle! You also have to battle the pedophile court cases worth millions of poor devotee donated money that you have to give away. If the poor devotees ever knew, that that's where their hard earned cash would go, they wouldn't have donated.

    The very agenda of carrying out a "battle" against all other lines of philosophies apart from their own is sick and full of hate! What happened to the see the soul and love them all verse of BG? Or is that only used in the discourse class? Besides I don't think HKs should feel any remorse if Prabhupada would be called similar names as you don't refrain from calling all other spiritual personalities as "nonesense, rascal" etc. Do I need to mention all most so called "Gurus" authorized and appointed by Sp fell off their positions! Was that not nonesense?


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    2. Soul is a part of God and is pure in its origin. I would like the learned HK community, to shed some light on the 'personal FORM' of this soul. You do repeat the BG words of - size of ten thousandth (or whatever) part of the tip of a hair thing, but what is the form? I'd love to know that. This is the second important question.

    (the soul is only a spark of light in this world, but in the spiritual world the body of the soul is non-different than the soul. Just like this spark can have a material body in this world, it can have a spiritual body in the transcendental realm. The spiritual body is made of eternal knowledge and bliss.)

    Your definitions of soul's "body" are nonesense! really. What is a soul's body? HKs don't have complete understanding of it. Nor do they have any means to see or experience it as the yogis do. They never make the inward journey through samadhi. All their activities are outward - prasadam, lectures, dancing, book distribution etc. (that's good too!).
    If it is a spark of light in this world, then you should understand the importance of this spark of light!!! Because of which you can think and do whatever you are doing - love and inquiry into the higher self. This spark has is the seat of paramatma in the gross material body.
    What is the form of Paramatma?

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Guruvani
    Y k: 3. Also, in BG, Krishna showed his eternal universal form. And this form had every other form in it. So what is the real Krishna form? The one standing with a flute with a cow and gopies? Or the universal form? My third question.
    I'd like the servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of servants of God to Please.. shed some light on this.

    Guruvani: (The Universal Form of Krishna is not his eternal form. It is something only seen by a few rare souls in this material world. That is why it is called the Universal form, because it is composed of all the forms that he has in this material universe. In the spiritual world there is no universal form of the Lord as Arjuna saw on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra.)

    Do HK really understand the meaning of this universal form? Did Krishna show that all forms are his. And did he say in BG that through whichever form one worships him, he comes to the devotee in that form! He didn't say the HK painting form is only real and the others are not.
    Ok. So what is the form of the Lord Hari in the "spiritual world" then?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    mrityuloka
    Age
    46
    Posts
    3,714
    Rep Power
    294

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Admin Note:
    namaste,
    What's the purpose of posting this here on HDF? Isn't it better if you deal directly with admins of that forum?

    I also must warn you that since you are copying and pasting other people's posts here, there might be copyright issues that you may be violating. Are you posting the content with authorization for all those users?

    And finally, how are HDF members supposed to reply to these? The policies of other forums and discussions that go on on those forums is clearly out of the scope of HDF and its members.

    Am I missing something?
    satay

  3. #3

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Dear Satay,

    Namaste!
    The administrators of that forum are HK biased. As they loose a debate, they bar you from teh conversation without any legitimate cause and u can't log in back.
    The only purpose to post if here is that this seems to be a non biased forum and does not cater to HK mentality alone. And that I want to still show an example of how the HKs adhere to and promote double standards in preaching and practical life.
    Another purpose of posting it here is to make the readers aware of biased forum policies of that forum administrators.
    Do you really think I need to contact every poster for copyright issues?
    Its a general discussion and anyone can copy comments that are public property widely available to anyone.

    I won't mind if the administrators of HDF forum remove this long post in a day or two. I hope some of the Iskcon related readers have read it and have something to ponder over.
    Regards,


    Quote Originally Posted by satay View Post
    Admin Note:
    namaste,
    What's the purpose of posting this here on HDF? Isn't it better if you deal directly with admins of that forum?

    I also must warn you that since you are copying and pasting other people's posts here, there might be copyright issues that you may be violating. Are you posting the content with authorization for all those users?

    And finally, how are HDF members supposed to reply to these? The policies of other forums and discussions that go on on those forums is clearly out of the scope of HDF and its members.

    Am I missing something?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Age
    48
    Posts
    750
    Rep Power
    1514

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Did I miss something? What is the site? I'm all for learning more from ISKCONites, even the "corrupt" ones.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Hari Om
    ~~~~~
    Quote Originally Posted by satay View Post
    Admin Note:
    And finally, how are HDF members supposed to reply to these? The policies of other forums and discussions that go on on those forums is clearly out of the scope of HDF and its members.

    Am I missing something?
    Namaste all,
    Net Net - what is the point, learning, etc. that is of value to the reader that advances ones thinking?
    Is it " administrators of that forum are HK biased" Yogkriya?

    If so, thank you for the warning, if not, what am I (we) missing here at HDF.... I would hope you will be so kind as bringing your learnings that is insightful.

    pranams,
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  6. #6

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Dear Yajvan,

    Pranam!

    So far I've found HDF site quite fair and the peopel posting fairly respectful to each other and interested in genuine questions. Even the HK ones. The other site (Audarya) has pro HK administrators like jahnava Nitai das etc. who pose on having a forum on various discussions, but all discussions lead to HK philosophy. If otherwise, the person is tried to be defeated with HK logic. If he is winning, they remove his posts and put a restriction so that he may log back in. This is a common practice, as experienced by others too. I'll post a short introduction somewhere I think on the introduction section. I'm thinking of removing the first post on HK questions or editing it to be shorter though. What do you think?
    Love!

    Yogkriya

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    Hari Om
    ~~~~~

    Namaste all,
    Net Net - what is the point, learning, etc. that is of value to the reader that advances ones thinking?
    Is it " administrators of that forum are HK biased" Yogkriya?

    If so, thank you for the warning, if not, what am I (we) missing here at HDF.... I would hope you will be so kind as bringing your learnings that is insightful.

    pranams,

  7. #7
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Hari Om
    ~~~~~~
    Quote Originally Posted by Yogkriya View Post
    Dear Yajvan,
    Pranam!
    So far I've found HDF site quite fair and the peopel posting fairly respectful to each other . I'm thinking of removing the first post on HK questions or editing it to be shorter though. What do you think?
    Yogkriya
    Namaste Yogkriya,
    Thank you for your note... yes, we here work to keep a balanced approach to the conversations. I want to say thank you for even asking for an opinion. May I recommend two readings on this site:
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=9648&postcount=1
    http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=9844&postcount=1

    Once you review you can decide on future posts' length, brevity, insights of the knowledge.

    pranams,
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  8. #8
    Join Date
    June 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    541
    Rep Power
    748

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Hmm,

    I think good questions with mind full of prejudice posted at a wrong place will not get proper answers. If you are sincere and really want to get the answers instead of propagating the so called 'judgements' i am ready to answer some of the questions raised.

    It is difficult for a son to hear anything bad about his father if there is blind love and faith.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    March 2006
    Location
    India
    Posts
    4,193
    Rep Power
    358

    Re: Some questions on HK

    Well below is what a supporter said in another thread in this forum itself.

    What is purpose of this thread - check for unaimed shoot outs. Every post that courts negative view on ISKCON is verily unsupported and there is great need of evidence. Make Allegations, Canvass people to make similar allegations , then what, where do we want to conclude this thread?

    Now, YK has at least left some records, though in a poorly organized way.
    That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.

  10. #10

    Re: Some questions on HK

    What I tried to emphasize is that in the HK world, things are HK and not exactly Sanatan or all 'Vedic' as propagated.
    As far as so called 'scriptural evidences' are concerned, then the HK world does not recognize anything that is not labeled 'bonafide' and line with their philosophy. May it be then Vedic, puranic or Upanashid verses. They would accept selected quoted from Padma Puran, but discard Shiva Gita part of Padma Purana as concocted just because it does not meet their philosophical needs. Similarly Bhagvat Gita is accepted - a part of Mahabharata, but when Krishna himself describes about Shiva in Anushasana Parva, they ignore and at times reject it.
    Attachment to one's deity is fine. But the effort to remold the whole Vedic Sanatan Dharma literature and culture according to Gaudiya Vaishnavism's fancies and projecting to the rest of the world that this is the only proper way and Hinduism is hodge podge BS, is not acceptable.

    And frankly speaking, in spite of the nice bhakti shashtra lectures and bhakti vibes and devotion, the HK community has and will always be in conflict in most societies, because of this approach that sounds over boastful at times.
    Its a society based more on propaganda sadhna than Self/God realization sadhna. Learning to preach to others has become the aim. Not learning to realize here.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •