Re: Vaishnava vs(?) ISKCON?
Namaste Avyaydya,
I agree there could not be any broad brush applied to understand such issues in black and white.
Therefore, though there is a concern about sectarianism that is genuine, but practically speaking sects are required, even desirable, to preserve diversity in society. And diversity belongs to more evolved mode of living, as we both would agree.
For example, in my view it is not possible for even a polytheist like me to be worshipping both Shiva and Vishnu at the same time. I still need to go visit their temples in different areas. So the need for sects, sampradayas, is surely there on the modal level, if not on the temporal level (because a poly can be Shaivaite today and Vaisnava tomorrow).
There is also something called "world movement" which though outwardly seen to be the body of Inertia, or Ignorance, may yet contain Intelligence of highest order within its essence. Even a temple is not an ordinary architecture - it is meant to be a practical Yantra that has the power to exert higher consciousness and the joy of life over even the lay passers by.
Customs are the interface between Dharma and the region of its adaptation. Even within India though the Bharat tribe was the one to have discovered it, Dharma flowed to other parts and today we do see how it has adapted very well in innumerable diverse ways in all the expanse.
On the other hand, a mere transfer of customs and symbols is surely meaningless. For example, the Nazi swastika seen as an import of Hindu swastika is meaningless.
But then we should give at least some more due to an acharya (if he isn't an acharya I don't know who else is) like Prabhupada who knew well what he was doing. You may not see a lot of that insight in his writings, but there is a lot to be found and learned there into the practises he established.
Pranam Smaranam ji,
I don't say that Vaishnavism with a more Advaitic tinge is not there, or isn't right, but as a neutral observer in this regard I've found Vishnu worship in the main to be more along the lines Prabhupada understands it as. But I can be wrong.
There is always some part of KrishNa that can never be absorbed or identified with: this is as far the approach can go. There is always some mystery about Sri Vishnu that remains till the end. Anyway, this is the impression I've got. If ISKCON wants to believe and commit to its own way that it thinks is right, and there is evidence for it in texts other than merely credibility of the acharya, we should respect that. Though you have also said the same thing.
Things to remember:
1. Life = yajña
2. Depth of Āstika knowledge is directly proportional
to the richness of Sanskrit it is written in
3. Āstika = Bhārata ("east") / Ārya ("west")
4. Varṇa = tripartite division of Vedic polity
5. r = c. x²
where,
r = realisation
constant c = intelligence
variable x = bhakti
Bookmarks