I used to be a hindu

[Riverwolf]

The point of disagreement between us is that you are basing your understanding on your personal understanding, thinking it to be intelligence. I, on the other hand, am basing my understanding on the teachings of the scriptures, thinking that to be intelligence.

A person, who worships a Demi-God or Goddess, cannot attain the Supreme. So, I do not think I am interested in this so-called knowledge they have imparted. If someone is interested, it is his wish.

kāmais tais tair hṛta-jñānāḥ
prapadyante 'nya-devatāḥ
taḿ taḿ niyamam āsthāya
prakṛtyā niyatāḥ svayā​

Those whose intelligence has been stolen by material desires surrender unto demigods and follow the particular rules and regulations of worship according to their own natures.[B.G. 7.20]

Asides, if you have some scriptural verses to prove your point, I am willing to take this further with you. I do not intend to waste your time discussing personal point-of-views, which can conveniently disregard all or certain portions of scriptures, accept some portions, change and so on.

What demi-God or demi-Goddess are you referring to? The members of Ramakrishna Order are as varied in their theism as anyone else.

There is intelligence in the Scriptures, but they're not infallible.

 

[Riverwolf]

Who decides that this great wisdom is at the same level as transcendental scriptures? What is his qualification to make such a decision? Does he even know the scriptures to pass a judgement like that?

I have read many Scriptures from many religions, as well as many Scriptures from Hinduism, and their commentaries. Each has great wisdom, some more than others.

Wisdom is the ability to use knowledge in a beneficial way. So, when I say that I observe much wisdom, I am saying that I read many teachings that are potentially very beneficial.

Besides, how can a book be transcendental? They were written by humans.

There is nothing to this effect in the Śrimad Bhagavatām. Had devotion been the easiest, it would have the largest number of devotees. On the contrary, you will find, it has the least!

I thought Vaishnavism was the largest sect of Hinduism in India.

You can change it to 'major chunk of Hindu religion' for ease of understanding.

But even still, just because the events may not be exact history, that does not make them any less valuable; if anything, them being more mythological makes them FAR more rich.

I've read a little bit of the Adi Parva of the Mahabharata. Thus far, I fully accept it as the "fifth Veda." (Though I mourn the fact that the Purana it spoke of, nowadays referred to as "Adi-Purana", is almost certainly lost to time.)

Still, the emanation will always remain inferior to the source.

The source of science is observation. That is timeless.

Spiritual advancement means to uplift one's level of consciousness. Sex is the opposite, it binds us to the impermanent material conception of life. Celibacy & spirituality are forever connected ... through 'consciousness'.

I disagree. Not all sex is pure sense satisfaction. It can also be a huge expression of deep love, and a way to build connection. While I don't really adhere to the notion of sex and sexuality being a path to the Supreme, it's not necessarily a hindrance, either.

To know that space technology exists, I need to study and advance in the discipline. It is done in a bonafide institution & under an expert guide, and not whimsically.

Study the discipline of spirituality under an expert guide (spiritual master) in a bonafide disciplic succession (authorized by the scriptures).

That doesn't answer my question.

'Spirit' of doubting is disbelief. Inquiry is the beginning, not doubting.

Can't inquire without doubt of the established state of things. Spirit of doubting is not disbelief. I don't know who told you that, but he/she is misinformed in this matter.

Dualism and non-dualism - both are different levels of realization of the same Absolute Truth. You are not wrong, I am not wrong. Just levels of understanding is different.

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, a Great Shaiva Sage, has taught that the highest level of understanding is qualified non-dualism, which is the recognition of both paths being necessary, with the first step being dualism, and the next being non-dualism.

A variation of this, which I believe and try to follow is:

sri-bhagavan uvaca
aham bhakta-paradhino
hy asvatantra iva dvija
sadhubhir grasta-hridayo
bhaktair bhakta-jana-priyah​

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said to the brahmana: I am completely under the control of My devotees. Indeed, I am not at all independent. Because My devotees are completely devoid of material desires, I sit only within the cores of their hearts. What to speak of My devotee, even those who are devotees of My devotee are very dear to Me. [S.B. 9.4.63]

Indeed. ^_^

Because it is from the timeless scriptures, and not my fallible personal point-of-view.

Those Scriptures were written at one point, before which they did not exist. The Puranas are not timeless.

That is incorrect. Modern science itself is evolving, it is in the learning stage. Someone, who himself is learning cannot impart perfect knowledge. Most of the world is now turning to Yoga and Ayurveda, which is the gift of spirituality (scriptures) to the mankind. Should be proof enough, unless you consider half the world to be mad and foolish.

Argumentum ad numerum: argument from the number of people who believe it, is logically fallacious. Just because a large amount of people believe something to be true, does not make it true. But just because they may be wrong, does not make them mad and foolish. So, yes, they may be wrong, and no, I do not think they're necessarily mad and foolish for it.

Besides, I don't think Yoga and Ayurveda are completely invalid. Both are great modes of everyday living, and could almost certainly help cut down the visits to the hospital. But they aren't infallible, and there's much they don't have that modern science does. They should supplement each other, rather than working against each other.

I have done my research and am convinced.

So, you have read all 18 Puranas?

Besides, I have also done research, and I am not convinced of anything beyond the existence of Gods. We shall see what further research will bring, because there's always going to be that one small bit of information that could potentially change one's entire paradigm about the way things are.

Spirituality is to transcend the material creation and attain the kingdom of Supreme Lord. A place that is eternal, full of knowledge and full of bliss.

I think we somewhat disagree as to what the English word "Spirituality" refers to. It means, to increase one's spirit, which in this case is somewhat related in concept to the word "attitude."

...if that's not further proof as to how much English as a language sucks, when the same word can have two completely different meanings, I don't know what is.

Inquiry is the first step.

Logic comes after inquiry, when information has been given, which we are trying to understand. Here also, the intent should be to try and understand and question that which we do not understand. Not doubt.

Inquiry cannot exist without doubt.

The verse says 'we should inquire'. Please re-read.

Please re-read the quote. We SHOULD inquire about the Brāhman.

Ah, yes, I did misread. I thought it said "Not one." My bad.

Believe what you must.

Why won't you answer the question? Is there no reason?

ajñaḥ — a fool who has no knowledge in standard scriptures; ca — and; aśraddadhānaḥ — without faith in revealed scriptures; ca — also; saḿśaya — of doubts; ātmā — a person; vinaśyati — falls back; na — never; ayam — in this; lokaḥ — world; asti — there is; na — nor; paraḥ — in the next life; na — not; sukham — happiness; saḿśaya — doubtful; ātmanaḥ — of the person.

It seems that there's a lot of fluff in that word-by-word translation. Again, based on some research, the word "ajnah" simply means one without knowledge, without specifying what that knowledge entails.

So, whoever wrote that worked in a personal interpretation into the translation. Though considering how poorly Sanskrit translates into English, that's almost impossible to avoid. That's why multiple translations from multiple viewpoints are vital.

Besides, the word "samshaya" may literally translate into "doubt", but that doesn't mean the concept is actually the same. The word might have had different connotations when that verse was composed.

And if the word is meant to be the same, then that part of the verse is wrong.

That is your perception. This world is termed as 'dukhalayam-ashashavatam' by the Supreme Lord. Meaning, it is a temporary place, and full of miseries. There is no real happiness here.

Then how is "real" happiness defined?

 

[Riverwolf]

Because the quote in context was also utilised for the devotees who changed from ISKCON to SCS Math, or for those who joined other Gaudiya Vaishnava organisations, such as Srila Narayan Maharaj. I personally do not believe that Lord Narayana would care a jot or tittle of who I marry. I know that my former godsister and godbrother would have preferred that I marry into the Math, and an ISKCON devotee tolerable... but under no circumstances would they ever accept a disciple from Srila Narayan Maharaj to be married to me.

These deep-seated tendencies and roots towards sectarianism amongst Gaudiya Vaishnava maths, amongst Vaishnava denominations, amongst the Hindu religions, and amongst the other religions at large are sickening to me. And to a larger extension, prejudice against homosexuals, especially when I know a few homosexual devotees who are engaged in service at the local temple. Without their service, the temple wouldn't function as much.

We are all rooted with anarthas, and I would rather that I focus on my own than that of others.

Sri Krishna Chaitanya came for the fallen, even the homosexuals. He came for the fallen, not the pure devotees. He came for the women, when no woman could even be pujaris or wear Vaishnava tilaka on their heads.

Heck, women wearing Vaishnava tilaka is a new thing... I believe it was a tradition begun very recently, from Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur or one of his spiritual descendents, like Srila Prabhupad.

OR women being pujaris. That is a very new innovation, actually. Or the fact that caste-consciousness does not appear when it comes to pujari work is also new.

The usage of OTHER instruments (like harmonium) BESIDES mrdanga and karatalas is also an innovation that the other Gaudiya organisations did not recommend because 'Mahaprabhu did not use these instruments.' Srila Prabhupad gave allowance and expanded the Gaudiya tradition in this way.

Mahaprabhu came for everyone, that regardless of vidhi, he wanted everyone to chant the names of God, and just devote oneself to Him, whether woman or man, householder or renunciate, gay or straight, married or single.

It is inevitable. In Canada, we already have gay and lesbian householders who are raising families with children. Why not just give them Krishna consciousness, rather than judging their families and ways of life? The Krishna conception is non-sectarian by theory - by praxis it should be too.

Jai Sri Caitanya!!

 

[Gaura Priya]

What demi-God or demi-Goddess are you referring to? The members of Ramakrishna Order are as varied in their theism as anyone else.

There is intelligence in the Scriptures, but they're not infallible.

Traditional Vaishnavite commentaries will speak of 'devatas' referring to the other divinities who are under the jurisdiction of Lord Vishnu/Krishna, who is regarded as the Supreme Lord, such as Parvati, Ganesha, Skanda, Saraswati, Brahma, and others.

ISKCON in particular, due to its Vaishnavite stance, translates 'devata' in this manner as 'demigods/demigoddesses,' while 'the gods' could just suffice, to differentiate that order.

Scriptures are subject to eternal interpretation. I prefer orthopraxy to orthodoxy.

"...That literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc., of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilisation. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest."

-- Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.5.11

I've probably exhausted myself in quoting this particular verse hundreds of times, but it is nonetheless applicable. Grnanti in the verse ('accepted') seems to also be translated as 'to follow' or 'to spread'.

To me, the purpose of the Vedic literatures was not to burden us with a wealth of spiritual information, but to continue to guide us into practicing true jaiva-dharma, or the religion of the soul, by aligning itself with God, regardless of the conception or interpretation, or even spiritual tradition.

And that includes gays, lesbians and transsexuals, the tritiya-prakrtas of both the ancient and modern world.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, a Great Shaiva Sage, has taught that the highest level of understanding is qualified non-dualism, which is the recognition of both paths being necessary, with the first step being dualism, and the next being non-dualism.

That's so funny. I respect Satguru Shivaya Subramuniyaswami, and it seems that I have read countless times in the Vaishnava tradition that non-dualism is another conception of God, while the ultimate conception of God is in non-qualified dualism.



God has a sense of humour, no doubt.

 

[Riverwolf]

Traditional Vaishnavite commentaries will speak of 'devatas' referring to the other divinities who are under the jurisdiction of Lord Vishnu/Krishna, who is regarded as the Supreme Lord, such as Parvati, Ganesha, Skanda, Saraswati, Brahma, and others.

ISKCON in particular, due to its Vaishnavite stance, translates 'devata' in this manner as 'demigods/demigoddesses,' while 'the gods' could just suffice, to differentiate that order.

Scriptures are subject to eternal interpretation. I prefer orthopraxy to orthodoxy.

"...That literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc., of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilisation. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest."

-- Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.5.11

I've probably exhausted myself in quoting this particular verse hundreds of times, but it is nonetheless applicable. Grnanti in the verse ('accepted') seems to also be translated as 'to follow' or 'to spread'.

To me, the purpose of the Vedic literatures was not to burden us with a wealth of spiritual information, but to continue to guide us into practicing true jaiva-dharma, or the religion of the soul, by aligning itself with God, regardless of the conception or interpretation, or even spiritual tradition.

And that includes gays, lesbians and transsexuals, the tritiya-prakrtas of both the ancient and modern world.

Sri Ramakrishna told a story about a man who was in a temple singing the Bhagavad-Gita, but he was doing it completely wrong. All the other devotees were laughing at him for it. Nevertheless, despite his frequent mistakes and the jeers from others, he continued with joy and love. When a Sage came in and asked why he was so happy despite the fact that he was making so many mistakes, he responded that, when he sang, he could imagine Krishna giving the instructions to Arjuna, which made him very happy. The Sage then praised the man for his bhakti and understanding of the message despite his mistakes, and chastised the devotees who had jeered at him.

 

[Riverwolf]

That's so funny. I respect Satguru Shivaya Subramuniyaswami, and it seems that I have read countless times in the Vaishnava tradition that non-dualism is another conception of God, while the ultimate conception of God is in non-qualified dualism.



God has a sense of humour, no doubt.

Absolutely. Heck, come to think of it, the entire story of Krishna's youth is a lighthearted comedy.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Sri Ramakrishna told a story about a man who was in a temple singing the Bhagavad-Gita, but he was doing it completely wrong. All the other devotees were laughing at him for it. Nevertheless, despite his frequent mistakes and the jeers from others, he continued with joy and love. When a Sage came in and asked why he was so happy despite the fact that he was making so many mistakes, he responded that, when he sang, he could imagine Krishna giving the instructions to Arjuna, which made him very happy. The Sage then praised the man for his bhakti and understanding of the message despite his mistakes, and chastised the devotees who had jeered at him.

That sounds so similar to the story given to us about Lord Chaitanya and the illiterate brahmin. It may as well be the very story, and then relegated to Sri Ramakrishna.

I loved the story because it shows that shastra and bhakti-sadhana is for everyone, not just for those who can renounce and follow the rules and regulations, yama, niyama, etc.

There once was a poor illiterate brahmin who lived in the outskirts of a city known for its Sanskrit recitation. He would come near the Ranganatha temple and recite the Bhagavad Gita, but he did not know how to read Sanskrit. The people in the city would jeer and laugh at him, but he continued reciting.

One day, as Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was touring South India, he came in for darshana at the Sri Ranganatha temple and saw the brahmin crying.

Sriman Mahaprabhu, Sri Gaurangadeva, felt immense compassion for the individual, and asked him, "My dear brahmin, why are you crying?"

The brahmin replied, "The people laugh at me, but my divine master told me to recite Srimad Bhagavad Gita. Although I do not know how to read nor understand the Sanskrit, whenever I recite, I can see Arjuna and his Supreme Master, Lord Krishna, as his Charioteer. With this I feel immense divine love within me, and I am moved to tears of loving devotion. I love Krishna so much, and by doing this I am always hearing Him (shravanam), remembering Him (smaranam) and reciting His glories (kirtanam)."

Lord Gauranga replied, "Your recitation is perfect, for you have found the inner meaning of the Gita." The Lord then proceeded to embrace the brahmin, and immediately the brahmin was overwhelmed with love and ecstasy, and his soul was liberated and brought back Home, back to God.

Haribol!

 

[Riverwolf]

That sounds so similar to the story given to us about Lord Chaitanya and the illiterate brahmin. It may as well be the very story, and then relegated to Sri Ramakrishna.

I loved the story because it shows that shastra and bhakti-sadhana is for everyone, not just for those who can renounce and follow the rules and regulations, yama, niyama, etc.

There once was a poor illiterate brahmin who lived in the outskirts of a city known for its Sanskrit recitation. He would come near the Ranganatha temple and recite the Bhagavad Gita, but he did not know how to read Sanskrit. The people in the city would jeer and laugh at him, but he continued reciting.

One day, as Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was touring South India, he came in for darshana at the Sri Ranganatha temple and saw the brahmin crying.

Sriman Mahaprabhu, Sri Gaurangadeva, felt immense compassion for the individual, and asked him, "My dear brahmin, why are you crying?"

The brahmin replied, "The people laugh at me, but my divine master told me to recite Srimad Bhagavad Gita. Although I do not know how to read nor understand the Sanskrit, whenever I recite, I can see Arjuna and his Supreme Master, Lord Krishna, as his Charioteer. With this I feel immense divine love within me, and I am moved to tears of loving devotion. I love Krishna so much, and by doing this I am always hearing Him (shravanam), remembering Him (smaranam) and reciting His glories (kirtanam)."

Lord Gauranga replied, "Your recitation is perfect, for you have found the inner meaning of the Gita." The Lord then proceeded to embrace the brahmin, and immediately the brahmin was overwhelmed with love and ecstasy, and his soul was liberated and brought back Home, back to God.

Haribol!

That's probably the same story, and I just read it in the Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna.

I was also telling it from memory.

Either way, I love it.

 

[Vinayaka]

Once discussion gets to the rudeness point of hearing that my beloved Lord Siva is just a mere demi-god, I cringe in sadness, awaiting the day when tolerance and understanding return to the waves of consciousness, as waves of energy so beautifully flow through all the forms within the pantheon we Hindus call Hinduism, in all temples, in all sects. And if such rudeness becomes intolerable to the sensitive soul, just as some people faint at the sight of blood, its is time to return to His temple, to seek solace in the Darshan of He who is without a second, a silent place where His Darshan is not in words, but in Love.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Once discussion gets to the rudeness point of hearing that my beloved Lord Siva is just a mere demi-god, I cringe in sadness, awaiting the day when tolerance and understanding return to the waves of consciousness, as waves of energy so beautifully flow through all the forms within the pantheon we Hindus call Hinduism, in all temples, in all sects. And if such rudeness becomes intolerable to the sensitive soul, just as some people faint at the sight of blood, its is time to return to His temple, to seek solace in the Darshan of He who is without a second, a silent place where His Darshan is not in words, but in Love.

As a person who has represented the Vaishnava tradition for so long, I am sorry to see that your beloved Shiva has been slighted by fellow Hindus.

Inasmuch as my bias will always remain, we can all still respect each other in a most civil manner, and I am sorry for the behaviour that my fellow Vaishnavites have done in the name of Lord Vishnu.

As per the writings of dear Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur, all religions, even Shaivism, are part of the one eternal Dharma, with differing cultures, constitutions and practices that show the variegatedness of the Lord Himself. They all have something to offer the world, something beautiful, and I thank Lord Narayana for opening my eyes so I can see that.

May we all be harmonised into the common thread of humanity.

 

[Vinayaka]

even Shaivism,

Really? That's good to know. I understand the intent, I think, but it came out wrong.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Really? That's good to know. I understand the intent, I think, but it came out wrong.

Well, hearing about the way the Madhvites treated Shaivites... and the way Shaivites treated Sri Ramanujacharya and his disciples... Some apology is a good start.

 

[Riverwolf]

Well, hearing about the way the Madhvites treated Shaivites... and the way Shaivites treated Sri Ramanujacharya and his disciples... Some apology is a good start.

Could you fill me in? I'm not familiar with any of that.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Could you fill me in? I'm not familiar with any of that.

I am never too sure of the historicity of these things, but during the time of Sri Ramanujacharya, his disciples in defending the Vaishnava faith, had their eyes gouged out by the Chola kings who were staunch Shaivas.

Sri Ramanujacharya was subjected to men who tried to kill him for spreading the belief of Vaishnavism, and refusing (as well as his followers) to renounce the idea that Lord Narayana is Supreme.

The Chola king about this time was Kulothunga I and he was a staunch Saivite. He ordered Ramanuja to subscribe to his faith in Siva and acknowledge Siva as the Supreme Lord.


Two of the disciples of Ramanuja, Kuresa and Mahapurna, donned the orange robes of Sannyasins and visited the court of Kulothunga I in place of Ramanuja. They argued there for the superiority of Vishnu. The monarch refused to hear them and had their eyes put out.


The two unfortunate people started for Srirangam--their native place. Mahapurna was a very old man, and unable to bear the pain, died on the way. Kuresa alone returned to Srirangam.


Ramanuja

And as Madhvacharya is concerned, I have heard that Sri Madhva's disciples went crazy at some point and killed a bunch of Shaivites, but I can not seem to find any information regarding that.

What IS well known to me though is the bitter arguing and relative back-and-forth prejudices between the two Dharmas. While I was told that worshipping Shiva was good for sense enjoyment, my Shaiva friend was told growing up that devotees worship Lord Vishnu/Krishna for sense pleasures.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Once discussion gets to the rudeness point of hearing that my beloved Lord Siva is just a mere demi-god, I cringe in sadness, awaiting the day when tolerance and understanding return to the waves of consciousness, as waves of energy so beautifully flow through all the forms within the pantheon we Hindus call Hinduism, in all temples, in all sects.

Early on in my RF life when I heard of saw this type of posts I would just want to strike back, hard and without mercy. I found it was fairly easy to undo the cruelty. Get them to back down. This I try to stop my self. I try not to fight back so hard. I think your way is much better, even though we allow the boards to be full of rudeness. I also believe that much of the poor dharmic behavior comes from very few. I think it is also clear to those on the outside that this type of calling your Ishta a dimi- God just lower them in the eyes of all reasonable people. There bigoted ways comes with a high price. Accusations of Disciples killing there Gurus, Child molesting all types of all around bad behavior is manifest in there sampradayas not occasionally but continually. They might believe that there philosophy is the most pure it is clear that their purity exists totally in their own imaginations. Being a Bigot comes with a price.

 

[Riverwolf]

I am never too sure of the historicity of these things, but during the time of Sri Ramanujacharya, his disciples in defending the Vaishnava faith, had their eyes gouged out by the Chola kings who were staunch Shaivas.

Sri Ramanujacharya was subjected to men who tried to kill him for spreading the belief of Vaishnavism, and refusing (as well as his followers) to renounce the idea that Lord Narayana is Supreme.



And as Madhvacharya is concerned, I have heard that Sri Madhva's disciples went crazy at some point and killed a bunch of Shaivites, but I can not seem to find any information regarding that.

What IS well known to me though is the bitter arguing and relative back-and-forth prejudices between the two Dharmas. While I was told that worshipping Shiva was good for sense enjoyment, my Shaiva friend was told growing up that devotees worship Lord Vishnu/Krishna for sense pleasures.

Wow. I'm not surprised, but that's terrible.

As a Shaiva, I do not hold there to be much difference between Shiva and Vishnu. Vishnu is auspicious ('siva') and Siva is all-pervasive ('vishnu').

 

[Vrindavana Das]

Because the quote in context was also utilised for the devotees who changed from ISKCON to SCS Math, or for those who joined other Gaudiya Vaishnava organisations, such as Srila Narayan Maharaj. I personally do not believe that Lord Narayana would care a jot or tittle of who I marry. I know that my former godsister and godbrother would have preferred that I marry into the Math, and an ISKCON devotee tolerable... but under no circumstances would they ever accept a disciple from Srila Narayan Maharaj to be married to me.

These deep-seated tendencies and roots towards sectarianism amongst Gaudiya Vaishnava maths, amongst Vaishnava denominations, amongst the Hindu religions, and amongst the other religions at large are sickening to me. And to a larger extension, prejudice against homosexuals, especially when I know a few homosexual devotees who are engaged in service at the local temple. Without their service, the temple wouldn't function as much.

There is no mention of devotees changing from ISKCON to SCS Math etc. in the quote. I will take it for what it says, than to believe some whimsical interpretation. I have pointed out what the quote is clearly saying.

As for sectarianism, where does it not happen. It is a part of material nature all humans are conditioned with...including you and me. Secondly, I do not think Hindus are prejudiced against homosexuals. It is just that homosexuality is not acceptable in scriptures. There is no prejudice in stating or following what is correct. Prejudice is a perception here, not a fact. If there was prejudice, homosexuals would not have been engaged in the service of the Temple.

We are all rooted with anarthas, and I would rather that I focus on my own than that of others.

Your beliefs are quite the opposite to what you say here. You are denouncing what religion and scriptures uphold as 'correct' to justify anarthas like homosexual tendencies. Do you see the irony?

Sri Krishna Chaitanya came for the fallen, even the homosexuals. He came for the fallen, not the pure devotees. He came for the women, when no woman could even be pujaris or wear Vaishnava tilaka on their heads.

If you know the story of Jagai Madhai, Sri Krishna Chaitanya delivered them and told them that they should NEVER again engage in sinful activities. So, you can say that Sri Krishna Chaitanya came even for the homosexuals, but, they should give up the act of homosexuality after accepting initiation.

Heck, women wearing Vaishnava tilaka is a new thing... I believe it was a tradition begun very recently, from Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur or one of his spiritual descendents, like Srila Prabhupad.

It could be your belief, but this is not a fact. Women wore Tilakas even when Lord Krishna appeared 5000 years ago. It is not a new thing.

OR women being pujaris. That is a very new innovation, actually. Or the fact that caste-consciousness does not appear when it comes to pujari work is also new.

Women even today are not Pujaris at Temples. I am not aware that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu said anything to the effect that Women should be pujaris. If you know, please advise. I will be happy to learn.

The usage of OTHER instruments (like harmonium) BESIDES mrdanga and karatalas is also an innovation that the other Gaudiya organisations did not recommend because 'Mahaprabhu did not use these instruments.' Srila Prabhupad gave allowance and expanded the Gaudiya tradition in this way.

These OTHER instruments are not traditional, but there is no restriction on them being used in the service of Supreme Lord. In fact, EVERYTHING material exists for the service of Supreme Lord and MUST be used for His service. It is an inappropriate parallel to compare the use of something like these instruments to justify homosexuality in religion, which is forbidden and punishable.

Mahaprabhu came for everyone, that regardless of vidhi, he wanted everyone to chant the names of God, and just devote oneself to Him, whether woman or man, householder or renunciate, gay or straight, married or single.

This is a sahajiya view-point. Thoroughly wrong and misleading. Please reflect on the example of Jagai & Madhai.

It is inevitable. In Canada, we already have gay and lesbian householders who are raising families with children. Why not just give them Krishna consciousness, rather than judging their families and ways of life? The Krishna conception is non-sectarian by theory - by praxis it should be too.

Such irreligiousness is inevitable, that is why degradation happens...from Satyuga...to Kaliyuga...till God Himself has to descend to annihilate the miscreants in Kalki Avtaar.

I don't understand why do you want something 'scripturally wrong' to be accepted as 'right' in the Hindu religion. Why don't you tell the Churches to accept homosexuality. See the kind of replies you will get.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

What IS well known to me though is the bitter arguing and relative back-and-forth prejudices between the two Dharmas. While I was told that worshipping Shiva was good for sense enjoyment, my Shaiva friend was told growing up that devotees worship Lord Vishnu/Krishna for sense pleasures.

There is a down side to every thing in maya. Thats true with even the Hindu sects. I have posted about the down side of Tantra.

I have never been made uncomfortable at Shiva or Smarta temples or with the followers in general. It is clear we have our disagreements but I also find them polite. Now some Vaishnava are a different story. They don't get along with others Hindu's well. There is just no way to get around it. This is their down side.

I have never been told by a Siva Worshiper that my faith was less then or false. I can't tell you how many times follows of Vishnu have. It is not only Iskcon who have done it. They don't even get along with each other. A person from the Pushtimarg will not even eat prasad from a Gaudiya Vaishnava temple. Even eat at a wedding of a family member. I have a friend who took in a young college student. When he converted to a Vaishnava he won't even eat at their home now because they offer everything to Shiva.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I am never too sure of the historicity of these things, but during the time of Sri Ramanujacharya, his disciples in defending the Vaishnava faith, had their eyes gouged out by the Chola kings who were staunch Shaivas.

I don't think you can take this as a fact it seems unclear.
Attempts have also been made to connect these internal disturbances in the Chola kingdom with the story of the persecution suffered by Ramanuja in the hands of the Cholas. It is possible to come to an assumption, based on early biographical works on Ramanuja, that the Chola monarch who subjected Ramanuja and his followers to persecution was Athirajendra or his father Virarajendra. However, according to K. A. N. Sastri in his comprehensive history of the Cholas, other contemporary works on Ramanuja do not lend credence to this chronology of events that let to the demise of Athirajendra.
Ramanuja was the contemporary of Kulothunga II. It is Kulothunga II who banished Ramanuja from Tamil country and the latter had to seek refuge in Srirangapatna, Karnataka. Hence even bringing Ramunaja into Athirajendra's death would cause more confusion. Till Kulothunga II, all the Chola kings and emperors supported all the religions equally although they were staunch Saivaites.

Athirajendra Chola - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Even some Sri Vaishnava web sites don't take it as an historic fact. It seems up in the air.