kalki
Full Member
Posts: 161
|
Post by kalki on Jul 20, 2011 12:35:50 GMT -6
Good to see you here Kalki. Ya, same here, good to hear from you! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jul 21, 2011 12:27:17 GMT -6
About myself, well, I am kinda not so much into revealing about my vaishnava connections. I know that isn't always allowed on some forums, but I hope it is okay here. I have not yet dealt with all aspects of my relations with previous ashram/sanga members or even how the philosophy sits with me. No problemo! We respect your wish to guard your privacy. Tell us as much or as little as you want. Buddhism is a great tradition. I have the highest respect for it and I agree CV and most of Hinduism have little or no understanding of it. I like the thesis that Bhagavatism drew a great deal from Mahayana Buddhism of 1-5 cents. CE. This is an area I want to explore more thoroughly. Yes, CV as traditionally presented is packed in a thick layer of ignorance with respect to Buddhism and to views closer to home, like the Vedanta of Sankara and other traditions. It takes some careful study to crack through those layers of ignorance. It is like a fish packed in thick layers of ice to preserve it. I say let the fish thaw and perhaps swim again. Dumb idea #1: the Buddha came to stop asuras from sacrificing animals. Dumb idea #2: Sankara was a hidden Buddhist Dumb idea #3: Buddhism is nihilistic. Most of these ideas come from passages in this or that Purana and who knows who added it or when. None of them, nor a good many others deserve a moment of our time. i look forward to hearing more of your views as we go.
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jul 21, 2011 17:28:15 GMT -6
Dumb idea #2: Sankara was a hidden Buddhist
Dumb idea #3: Buddhism is nihilistic.
Most of these ideas come from passages in this or that Purana and who knows who added it or when. None of them, nor a good many others deserve a moment of our time.
Nitai ji, some points on this topic. Sankara's teachings are borrowed from Gaudapada who was influenced by Buddhist concepts/teaching according to many academic scholars. Just like Mahayana Buddhism is influential on Bhagavata according to you. Mahayana Buddhism does not look nihilistic at all to me. Theravada tradition has some elements of nihilism as it is presented in certain sects. What exactly will be mean by nihilism here? Therevada Buddhism refrains from speaking about the liberation in detail and focuses more on practicing to achieve that "boddhisattva" experience. In some ways, it is very useful because theistic sects including CV have made a mockery of religion through debating on metaphysical topics with confidence.
For example, Jagat ji and others said the following, The other day I heard Thakurji Krishna Chandra Shastri, one of the top two or three Bhagavata speakers in Vrindavan, speaking on the vastra-harana lila. He also said Krishna was a five-year-old boy, so what is the problem?
According to Dhyana Chandra's Paddhati, Krishna's age is given as follows:
mahārāja-kumāratayā bhogātiśayena samṛddhyā varṣa-māsa-dinānāṁ sārdhatayā sārdha-sapta-dinottara-nava-māsādhika-pañca-daśa-varṣa-parimitaṁ śrī-kṛṣṇasya vayo jñeyam (i.e., 15 years, 9 months, 7 1/2 days) | Radharani's age is given as 14-2-15.
For those who are rasikas, the following verse will be sufficient to lay to rest the 5-year-old, 8-year-old, 10-year-old theory.
citraṁ cira-sparśa-sukhāya cūcuke kurvantam akṣipram iyaṁ calekṣaṇā | svinnāṅgulīkaṁ pulakāñcita-śriyā savyena cikṣepa kucena keśavam ||106||
If anyone followed the outline of Sri Krishna Kirtan by Chandidas that I have been giving on my blog, you will see a fascinating development. It is a bit shocking for us that Chandidas represents Radha as a 10 year old in the beginning, being harassed by a Krishna who is not much older. Throughout SKK, Chandidas is at pains to show the maturing of Radha sexually and emotionally in that context. It is very interesting to say the least, and no doubt very specific to an outdated historical circumstance.
Rupa Goswami seems to start at the point where Chandidas leaves off in Radha-Krishna's maturation. In DKK or elsewhere, Radha and Krishna are in a kind of idealized state of love that is not the love of mature older married folks (which, believe me I think that mere mortals could do well to aspire to), but that of playful, innocent young lovers who have fully developed eroticism and emotional absoluteness of focus.
In my view, even older mature and successful couples would harbor this kind of love at the very core of their relationship.
The manjaris (9 is a little young, as far as I know) are the _perfect audience_. They are samajikas. They are participant observers, but more observers than participants. They are not "players".
This is a very subtle aspect of Gaudiya philosophy that Rupa Goswami has developed at is quite difficult for most people to understand. Especially those who have been trained in the external forms of religiosity.
I asked the following question that was ignored:
Can't Krsna do more at 8 year old than other children, especially when he killed so many demons so early? How can we so obsessed with the exact age details in human evolution as literally expressing God in his complete manifestation. Aren't you trying to delve into the emotion and intensity of the symbol of Radha and Krsna rather than sorting our the age? Does 9 year old manjari behave like a 9 year old human or 9 year old in other species in other planetary system where there is a symbol of Krsna corresponding to their species. I mean if Krsna lila occurs at multiple places in the multi-verse, do you think it appears only in the way we humans perceive everything according to our age sensitivity? Isn't it a bit too anthropocentric? Reading not only emotion but age specific details of an insignificant species in the cosmos and giving it much more weight than required? Don't u think if you are born in another universe in a different form of life, the myths will speak differently and the age specific details you are talking off will be different?
Can you please shed light on my question. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jul 22, 2011 11:32:24 GMT -6
Nitai ji, some points on this topic. Sankara's teachings are borrowed from Gaudapada who was influenced by Buddhist concepts/teaching according to many academic scholars. I wouldn't call them borrowed. I think the connection between Sankara and Gaudapada is way overblown. I think he did borrow some things perhaps, like the two levels of reality, conventional and absolute. But, he was also very creative and innovative. He came from a Vaisnava community and so Visnu was his idea of the absolute and synonymous with Brahman. He recognized bhakti as a means of purification leading to knowledge and as knowledge itself in one place. These are not Gaudapadan ideas. I admit I have not studied the question carefully, but I am sure that we cannot say that Sankara got his ideas from Gaudapada. Not me. This is a thesis put forward by Hacker in his book Prahlada. Surely, no one can mistake the similarity between the Prahlada of the Bhagavata and the bodhisattva of Mahayana Buddhistm. By nihilism, I mean the idea that zUnyatA means complete nothingness. The identification of samsara with zUnyatA in Mahayana Buddhism is comparable to the claim that worldly existence is impermanent, not that it does not exist. it is more complex than this, of course, but this is part of what it means. Yes, this stuff is pretty silly. The eternal ages of Krsna and the various gopis are important for those who do the smarana practice. It helps when one visualizes the lila. They are not meant to be a metaphysical lesson or teaching. Nor is they meant to be used as moral justifications to appease the offended middle-class moral sensitivities of modern listeners. [/b][/quote] Jagat, much as I love and respect him, gives himself over to bs and hyperbole at times. If you want some kind of following you have to do this, I guess. Tell the people what they want to hear. Anyway, it is doubtful that Rupa developed very much on his own. He drew mostly from the already existing alankarika tradition in India. IGMers are shocked when they discover this (if they ever do). Rupa Goswami mostly did borrow (unlike Sankara) from his predecessors (in my opinion from the tradition of Bhoja). Yes, he made some adjustments and did some rearranging in applying the ideas to Krsna lila, but most of it is borrowed. He took rati for instance which is one of the nine traditional bhavas and divided it into five: santa, dasya, etc. But mostly he just brought rasa aesthetics into the bhakti context. Well, I don't know what I can say. Your question places the whole idea of lila in a much larger context. it is like twenty questions rolled up together. It is certainly way beyond the medieval mindset usually maintained on the CV blogs run by Jagat and Advaita and dozens of others, both traditional and IGM. Naturally, what you say is true from a theoretical standpoint. The question is how does one realize it. That can only come through sadhana and then the question of what age should one envision Krsna and Radha in becomes more important. As one advances one grows beyond such narrow conceptions, one loosens up, and the light begins to get in. The texts we read and discuss are aimed at where we are (roughly), but they are not meant to keep us there. We have to transcend them at some point.
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jul 22, 2011 12:33:40 GMT -6
Let us explore Sankara some more in future. We need to investigate this from all points of view like you have done. Would you say the yogacara school actually speaks of the world as unreal and therefore is different from other streams of Buddhism?
Lastly, wanted to ask if you could open the yuga cycle pdf? (Sorry for pestering you). Again, I have to bring all these questions on this forum because there is almost no place in CV where these questions are discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jul 22, 2011 13:47:44 GMT -6
Let us explore Sankara some more in future. We need to investigate this from all points of view like you have done. Would you say the yogacara school actually speaks of the world as unreal and therefore is different from other streams of Buddhism? Lastly, wanted to ask if you could open the yuga cycle pdf? (Sorry for pestering you). Again, I have to bring all these questions on this forum because there is almost no place in CV where these questions are discussed. No I haven't yet, Vivekji. Remind of where you put that link. I have lost track of it.
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jul 22, 2011 14:56:30 GMT -6
www.safarmer.com/CosmicCycles.pdfI think the link should work now. If not, Hover the mouse over the link in your mail below, and you will see a special character between Cosmic and Cycles. Delete it from the url and you'll hit the paper. I don't know why your link has the special character. Please let me know. This is a very valuable paper according to me. It starts off like this:In the view of classical Hinduism, this world is the domain of time, and time is viewed as a cyclical process. Society and the entire created universe are subject to a recurring sequence of creation and destruction that is endless. he picture painted by the → Purānas, Dharmaśāstras ̣ (→ Dharmasūtras and Dharmaśāstras), and astronomical treatises known as Siddhāntas (→ astrology and astronom
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jul 23, 2011 9:57:12 GMT -6
Yes. I got it this time and saved a copy on my computer. I will give it a good read and give you reactions. Thanks for calling my attention to it, Vivekji.
|
|
kalki
Full Member
Posts: 161
|
Post by kalki on Jul 24, 2011 12:17:03 GMT -6
Dumb idea #1: the Buddha came to stop asuras from sacrificing animals. Dumb idea #2: Sankara was a hidden Buddhist Dumb idea #3: Buddhism is nihilistic. #1: my idea is that this is somewhat truthful? Well I mean the Buddha was against the idea of worshipping a God and doing things for that creator and claiming it was holy and especially when it came to killing animals in the name of religion. Buddha was against killing animals for food, asking someone to kill it for you, and thirdly knowing it was killed for you. The monks were permitted to accept offerings of meat only because they were not guilty of the three things. They can still pray for the swift rebirth of the animal without rejoicing in its death even while eating it to sustain their body. This is a highly debatable issue of course in this age of slaughterhouse industry and supply/demand, but that is a lengthy discussion for later. # 2: well I also accept this one. It is well known that Gaudapada, the param guru of Sankararchya, totally plagerized the writings of Nagarjuna the 3rd century Mahayan saint (is my date right? ) So I believe the Advaitins certainly saw something good in the language of the Buddhists and used it to their advantage to clarify the doctrines of phenomena more clearly. Until then, I believe the Vedanata was unclear. But I don't believe that he was trying to preach Buddhism per say, but just plagarize a bit here and there and get name and fame for scholarship. #3 : Ya, my point exactly. It is totally bunk that Buddhism is purported to be Nihilistic. In fact, within the concept of emptiness, the mind continues onward and may also visit pure lands and other realms to continue to give teachings or take teachings and also return to the earth to assist other sentient beings. More later when I have all my facts together. I have never tried to argue this point on the net yet, so this will be my first and will have to consult with some friends a lot. Yes, thanks for opening up the space!!!
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jul 24, 2011 23:38:19 GMT -6
www.ted.com/talks/tim_harford.htmlGood one on uncertainty of knowing things and having a little God complex (of knowing everything absolutely even when you are challenged). Tim Hartfold shows the importance of making good mistakes that have led to many important discoveries.
|
|
|
Post by cuckoo4cocopuffs on Jan 14, 2012 13:03:32 GMT -6
I have been lurking in the shadows since I was here as the Mojo guy. I am an admitted chocoholic and actually a dark chocolate fiend! I have a tinge of madness, but then again don't we all? For those who don't know me, you may be in for some surprises. I am anything but a creature of habit, and make it my mission in life to be unexpected. If you send me personal messages: caveat emptor (or some such Latin nonsense).
|
|
|
Post by karan1386 on Apr 27, 2012 15:43:59 GMT -6
Hi my name is karan , not initiated but have been following ISKCON for 6 years now, that's a lot of time considering that I am still not initiated, why? Because m afraid of falling down, and I know that is bad so I have been fooling myself for the last 6 years with the help of maya... Obviously getting nowhere but still I have developed a lot of knowledge (Gyan). I am good at it(there goes the aham)...I still lack Bhakti bhav and am aware of it.. But one thing is for sure if Srila Prabhupad comes to me in my dreams (using as a hypethetical comparable as I am not initiated to have a diksha guru) and tells me that there is no KRSNA, I will believe it. I pay my humble obeisances to Him. Danvat pranam to all, As i see here that most that are commenting here do not belong to any lineage in particular or even if they do ,they keep talking about excluding or 'not encouraging' IGM philosophy over here as it reflects vaishnav ninda and suspect it of not being in lineage, well if I am following Srila Prabhupad , I am happy even if he is not in direct lineage as according to you, I love him so much. But a request to administrators not to make such remarks which indicate or clearly say sometimes that ISKCON indulges in vaishnav ninda or other similar things as it would be detrimental to their own spiritual health, all the more if ISKCON is in direct lineage.
Second of all, it is my humble request to all the devotees or aspirants to understand that it is not a matter of our choice as to who our spiritual master would be , neither do we get to choose our lineage . And if we try , we can only do that by material speculation. There are two reasons why I would recommend not to do that 1). Our material minds or intelligence is too small(overstatement already) to understand the answers to some questions, example when I was a child- " when was god born, when did it all start?" people would simply say god is shashvatam(eternal) and I would shut up, but even today when I think of that question my head goes into a spin, because my material intelligence tells me that there has to be a start to something that is currently in progress. We are imperfect and so is our intelligence here..... If I put the same question a little differently which has caused many to fall down- " if we were in vaikuntha or god's abode in the state of Satcitananda, how did we fall down in the first place?" , as that state includes full bliss and full knowledge already, so where was the need and the desire and the act and desire of foolishness came despite the knowledge and the bliss already?, more, "if it happened from that state already , how can I be guaranteed that it will not happen again even after I attain that state again now after all my endeavour ?".... Here, the answer to that is- KRSNA's guarantee , but those who want to speculate with material intelligence will fall down as they will not find the answer and might tend to blame the philosophy for inadequacy. After all you are going back to GODHEAD, not to Disneyland. Thus these questions and hardships arise... Because going back to godhead requires immense surrender, no amount of speculation can compare to that , and with our material intelligence ,cannot even begin to compare. These are only examples, there are many more questions like these.... 2). If we do change or drop ourselves from the lineage, we might fall again from the new lineage or our independent approach as we are already in the habit of speculating and not surrendering....which will be much worse, as now we are already aware that material intelligence doesn't Lead to answers. We all know how important a lineage is, and we already know that we are no one ,and powerless, to decide or calculate the benefits of a particular lineage for us.
I request all of you to kindly bless me and pray that I have no more material distractions, as I want to go back to the place I belong , all glories to guru and gauranga, all glories to the devotees, HARE KRSNA.
|
|
ash
Junior Member
Posts: 61
|
Post by ash on Apr 28, 2012 12:50:23 GMT -6
Hello.
Ash - as in being burnt. That is how I feel about my experience with theism in general, and ISKCON in specific. A lot of bitterness, that I, over time, have gotten bored of, so I don't feel like getting into all that.
Now, I am more inclined toward traditional Theravada Buddhism. But somehow, there doesn't seem to be a conflict between that and some forms of theism, even GV theism. Which suprises me a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 30, 2012 11:09:35 GMT -6
Hi my name is karan , not initiated but have been following ISKCON for 6 years now, that's a lot of time considering that I am still not initiated, why? Because m afraid of falling down, and I know that is bad so I have been fooling myself for the last 6 years with the help of maya... Obviously getting nowhere but still I have developed a lot of knowledge (Gyan). I am good at it(there goes the aham)...I still lack Bhakti bhav and am aware of it.. But one thing is for sure if Srila Prabhupad comes to me in my dreams (using as a hypethetical comparable as I am not initiated to have a diksha guru) and tells me that there is no KRSNA, I will believe it. I pay my humble obeisances to Him. Danvat pranam to all, As i see here that most that are commenting here do not belong to any lineage in particular or even if they do ,they keep talking about excluding or 'not encouraging' IGM philosophy over here as it reflects vaishnav ninda and suspect it of not being in lineage, well if I am following Srila Prabhupad , I am happy even if he is not in direct lineage as according to you, I love him so much. But a request to administrators not to make such remarks which indicate or clearly say sometimes that ISKCON indulges in vaishnav ninda or other similar things as it would be detrimental to their own spiritual health, all the more if ISKCON is in direct lineage. Karanji, I am not sure you are in the right place. This is not an IGM friendly site. I at least do not have a high regard for Bhaktivedanta Swami (notice I do not refer to him as Prabhupada) and I knew him personally. Nor do I think highly of Sridhar Swami, Narayana Maharaj, or Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. I do not believe that these were actually Caitanya Vaisnavas and there is no doubt for me that they were in no lineage whatsoever that can be traced back to Mahaprabhu. These are for me and many of the others here simple truths, not speculations or guesses. Therefore, whatever came out of their mouths was bound to be a misrepresentation of CV. Beyond that, those folks really were Vaisnava-nindakas as anyone who has read any of their works knows. So I find it rather obnoxious of you to request that we not state these plain truths on this forum. I suggest you find another place to espouse your silly nonsense. Either that or grow up and leave that IGM baloney behind and find out what CV is really about. There are many here have have initiation into real lineages, who have taken the time to find out what CV is really about and to think about it. We do not need to waste our time baby-sitting you. This is a good example of IGM bullshit. The scriptures are very clear. The disciple must carefully examine his guru-to-be. He or she has a choice of whether to accept this or that person as worthy of being a guru. We are not blind, nor are we dumb. This nonsense about material intelligence is just a clever rouse to keep people in the dark and keep them under control. This is precisely the reason why religions and religious doctrine must be rejected. CV is not in my opinion a religion. Krsna (if you believe he actually spoke the Gita; if not, then someone speaking either under the inspiration of Krsna or in the mindset of Krsna) tells us to give up all dharmas (religions). Religions are created not to teach or preserve the truth, but to enrich some and enslave others. Their efficiency at doing that is a matter of the historical record. Real CV is anti-religious and anit-theistic. I don't expect you in your childish state to understand this, nor to accept my word for it. There are plenty of postings in this forum that make this point with evidence and arguments of various kinds. Read those and/or depart. I am reluctant to repeat myself again and again. Finding a living lineage and becoming properly initiated is only the beginning. Yes, it is true; one may fall away even if one's lineage is alive and strong and you are properly initiated. But you are not helpless. The onus is still on you to undertake the sadhana sincerely. Still, the gates are open if you belong to a living lineage. They are closed if you do not. Don't ask me why it is like this. There is something fundamentally important about coming into contact with a bhakta who is really connected to Mahaprabhu. Maybe it is only a psychological boost? Maybe feeling yourself connected with the perceived source is all one needs to overcome the many obstacles that stand between us and the Krsna world. I suspect that might be enough. Maybe is has to do with something in the characters of those who took the time to find a genuine representative of Mahaprabhu to learn from. What is it then that impairs those who really think that Bhaktivedanta was a real Vaisnava? It was probably Bhaktivedanta himself, limited insight, sadhu ninda, arrogance, shallow teachings, and so on. If you are a small fish the little pond he created may be enough for you.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Apr 30, 2012 12:31:45 GMT -6
Hello. Ash - as in being burnt. That is how I feel about my experience with theism in general, and ISKCON in specific. A lot of bitterness, that I, over time, have gotten bored of, so I don't feel like getting into all that. Now, I am more inclined toward traditional Theravada Buddhism. But somehow, there doesn't seem to be a conflict between that and some forms of theism, even GV theism. Which suprises me a lot. Greetings Ash and welcome to the forum. I wondered about your name. Ash is also a tree that is the Norse counterpart of the cosmic tree. According to Graves (The White Goddess, p 57): Ygdrasill was the enchanted ash, sacred to Woden, whose roots and branches in Scandinavian mythology extended through the Universe. So perhaps you are unconsciously ready for spring. Theism and ISKCON are definitely things that will burn one out. I managed to escape years ago before that happened, thanks to Dr. Kapoor. Sadly, we traditionalist CVs are not much more broadminded, as Vivekji is ever ready to point out. We seem to be as much hidebound to tradition as IGM to their version of it. There is something psychologically harmful about theism. I have made this point many times here, but no one seems to agree, especially Malatidi who does not or refuses to see the psychological damage it has done her and the rest of us. Krsna does not want us to love him as a god, but as a friend. As far as Theravada Buddhism goes, it is a fine tradition. One should learn how to meditate in the way of the Buddha. The only problem with it that I see is that it is a bit dry for my tastes. Rasa is absent. To what do you refer when you say their is no conflict between Theravada and CV?
|
|