Iskcon is a part of Hinduism - Confirmed

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste , hare krishnas.

Here is my one question # to all my iskconITES. Why Iskcon don't accept itself as vaishnawism ? Why hare krishnas says we are not hindus ?

Isn't krishna a hindu god ? Isn't iskcon is a branch of gaudiya vaishnawism ( hinduism ) ? Then what makes you to think iskcon not as a part of Hindu sanatana dharma ?

Besides , iskcon's official site WWW.Krishna.COM is propagating many myths about hinduism such as hinduism is not sanatana dharma , hindus worship demigods , hinduism includes only impersonal bramhan , Hinduism is polytheistic etc.
http://www.krishna.com/krishna-consc...-part-hinduism

I request you all to stop this act to defame hinduism and its other gods by spreading myths through krishna.com under the name of vaishnawism ( branch of hindu dharma ) .

Edited : Without any reason , iskcon has labelled itself as a non-hindu . Can we think it as a political attempt to attract non-hindus in Iskcon ? Here I am not offending hare krishnas . I just want to know if this is not reason ,what should be the reason ?



confirmed by hindu scholars :

International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), known colloquially as the Hare Krishna movement or Hare Krishnas, is a Gaudiya Vaishnava religious organisation . Gaudiya vaishnawism is a branch of vaishnawism and vaishnawism is one of the four main branches of Hinduism .
It was founded in 1966 in by Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.Its core beliefs are based on select traditional Indian scriptures, particularly the Bhagavad-gītā and the Śrīmad Bhāgavatam.

It claims their origin from chaitanya mahaprabhu who was a prominent hindu bengal saint and devotee of lord Krishna !

Thank you .Ram Krishna hari

[Anirudh]

Namaste hinduism♥krishna,

They are saying Hinduism is not Sanaatana Dharma. After reading the link you had given, I think they may be correct.

I just came across this interesting blog.

Members like Indiaspirituality Amrut can tell us whether Sanaatana Dharma Polytheistic?

[ShivaFan]

Namaste

I think I agree with Anirudh.

Also, while this is an ISKCON solicitation, perhaps a non-ISKCON reflection on this "controversial" site and link provided might be interesting, so I volunteer!

I do not agree with major aspects of ISKCON, in particular their obvious monicker of monism, but for that matter Hindus who only worship the Brahman as the true god or eternal truth also are arguably putting on the cloak of monism, but I do not reject them as part of the Family of Hinduism even though most ISKCON as well as impersonalist worshippers of the Supreme Brahman frown upon or reject the use of the term "hindu".

I read the link provided, and I think this is much ado about nothing. This website is not some general purpose Hindu website inviting all Hindus of a very diverse Family as cordial guests, rather it is very specific to Krishna centric Gaudiya related sect with roots to Bengal and Orissa, no different than for example a Murugan Temple website which obviously is not a "Hindu forum" and which obviously would spend most of its content on any local tales, history or traditions of the temple, glorification of Muruga and His leelas, and you probably are not going to find any murti of Krishna in the temple photo gallery shared on the web. What would you expect to find? A quote to the effect "Krishna is the Nirguna Brahman"? It's not going to be there, instead you may find a quote from a bhajan or scripture declaring Muruga as supreme or the all pervading Brahman or the Supreme Person and so on depending on the Sampradaya.

So what is being demanded of this ISKCON site? Stop what? Stop exercising their religious expression on a site dedicated specifically to the beliefs of their sect?

Yes, as I read the link provided, they clearly are saying "hindu" and "hinduism" are not Vedic terms. Many would agree with them. Even though I personally do not object to using the term, if this website specific to their sect objects and they do not want to be called such and consider themselves non-hindu, so? It's their website for their sect, not some parliament of Hinduism nor some collegic exercise or collaboration of many sects.

Yes, they are clearly saying only Krishna is the supreme and other incarnations are actually Krishna specifically or that many other Devas or Devi are "demigods". So? Again, it is a website dedicated to their sect and belief, what I do notice is they nevertheless are respectful not to harp on fixated and constant drumbeat such as "Shiva is ignorance" or "Ganesha is false!". No doubt they consider Shiva bhakts are under the influence of tamas or ignorant, but for a website which isn't general purpose Hindu forum they still are cordial considering the nature of site.

I understand the question is "why" they consider themselves non-hindu, and as a Saiva I should let them answer that, it's just that something is being demanded of them to stop something for which they have no obligation to stop. And in regards to the answer to this question the link itself already answers it...

And if further answers come, it will be obvious, that it is their belief, l mean what do you expect them to say? Duh....

This is much ado about nothing and full of "circling the wagons".

Om Namah Sivaya

[hinduism♥krishna]

श्री गणेशाय नमः

Namaste, aniruddha.

They think ,worshipping only krishna is the Sanatana Dharma and worshipping other gods is not a sanatana
dharma. If this is so, then what about bhagavan krishna who was a devotee of shiva ? then was Krishna not following sanatana dharma ?

Besides, they deny the existence of hindu dharma as there is no mention of hindu word in hindu scriptures. Is this the logic ? Certainly, 1st standard logic ! They certainly know the truth ! Original name of Hinduism is sanatana vesic dharma But they are intentionally hiding this from people around the world.

Now, what is Sanatana Dharma ? A difficult question ! According to my pov, At the supreme level, Hinduism is neither monotheistic nor polytheistic. According to our vedic culture , If one is a devotee of a certain deity, then it doesn't mean that he doesn't worship any other god. Worshipping other deities is the duty of followers of ved.Most sectarian people also don't worship only one god, yet they are devotees of one god . However we can confirm one thing, the goal of hindus is bramhan. So can we say sanatana dharma is monotheistic ? The question remains unanswered for me.


DHANYAVAD

ॐॐॐ

[Believer]

Namaste,

According to my pov, At the supreme level, Hinduism is neither monotheistic nor polytheistic.

That is the reason why we need Acharyas to set us straight. When laymen, with their limited knowledge/experience of the divine, start claiming that 'Hinduism is neither monotheistic nor polytheistic', what are we to do with their pov's? What exactly is Hinduism? What is the third option, if it is neither monotheistic nor polytheistic? Why should we waste time in debating another saadhak's pov, instead of spending time on our own sadhana and learning about what sages/rishis/acharyas with scriptural authority and personal realizations have to say? All these mental gymnastics involving trivial issues do not lead us to higher consciousness, which is the real business of life. When distractions take more time than the goal, it is a losing proposition, no matter how you look at it.

Pranam.

[hinduism♥krishna]

Namaste Shivafan,

It is ok to propagate the beliefs of sect but It's not right to defame other sects of sanatana dharma. It's not a hindu way !

Lord krishna is supreme bramhan. Fine ! But it's not their duty to specifically call other god as a demigod ! And what is this demigod ! Half god ? Is this the vedic word ? And is it right to call other gods as ordinary jiva ?
Is it right to say polytheistic is a bad thing and Hinduism is polytheistic ?

Dhanyavad

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam: I echo what ShivaFan said. It's their belief. I tolerate all non-violent expressions of religion. If I don't go there and participate, then why should it bother me? There is an old expression that applies in times like this: "Let it go in one ear and out the other." which means don't have what other people say affect you.

If someone wants to express their belief, so? It is a free country, after all. If your belief is that Siva is a demigod. all non-Pentecostals are going to hell, or that all dogs were born on Mars, what does it matter?

It matters what a person believes for themselves. Telling me my faith is false isn't going to affect me one iota. The contrary is also true. Me telling them they are wrong isn't going to affect them one iota either.

However .... You come into MY HOUSE, you bring it to arms, you make it very very personal, then sorry ... you just made it MY business.

But at this point nobody held a gun to my head to force me to read the content of a particular website.

Aum Namasivaya

[grames]

It is an interesting article which confuses people and i believe the intend is that. The content of the message clarifies why ISKCON should not be called "Hindu" or identified with the term "Hindu" but then jumps the ocean and gives some irrational justification of "other" faiths or following of the same "dharma". With the rational behind why ISKCON should not be called "Hindu", none of the practice of SD should be called with the label "Hindu". Technically, instead of unbranding the label, the article is teaching another whole new meaning to the Brand "Hindu".

This is very unhealthy stand PoV of krishna.com and this is not what their loved founder and Acharya has believed in. The GV is culmination of all Vaishnava thoughts, philosophy and practice and this is what their great goswamins acknowledge and advocate and Shri Prabupada also preached the same. The Label or Brand Hindu over simplifies the broad spectrum of the practices, faith and belief that exists in the south east asian land mass with certain geographical boundaries. None of the independent stream can identify themselves or itself as the entire "Hindu" representation ( of course, there are new groups who tend to do that and call themselves as the whole package of what Hinduism is) and SD is not a single practice faith system and none can be called or identified as "Hindu". Hindu or Hinduism is a compound name technically so with better understanding, i strongly believe no one should call themselves with the misleading compound name Hindu. I call myself or brand myself a Vaishnava and that is surely a member of the umbrella Hindu but not Hindu itself.

Hare Krshna!

[govind_das]

As to the question of whether or not ISKCON is a form of Hinduism, in several of Swami Prabhupada's books, he refers to himself as a Hindu. One reference I can give right offhand is in "Science of Self-Realization", p. 34, he says "So, you may be Christian and I may be Hindu", and there are other instances that I can't locate right now.
But based on that, I'd say that, despite what they call themselves according to ISKCON's founder, it is a form of Hinduism.

[Believer]

Namaste,

i strongly believe no one should call themselves with the misleading compound name Hindu.

And the pov's keep coming!

Nothing wrong with expressing one's opinion in a public forum, but is there any value added to the discussion? Is there ever a hope that people of Bharat will actually drop their identification as being Hindus? Will outsiders follow suit? Will Satay soon be changing the name of the forum? What difference does it make as to what label is used to identify oneself, as long as beliefs and practices rooted in the Vedic culture are accepted and adopted in our daily lives? I'm just sayin'.

Pranam.