ISKCON part of Hinduism???

[Metempsychosis]

Hello,do ISKCON folks consider themselves to be Hindus?I am asking this question after reading the lecture below

At a 1974 Mumbai lecture, Prabupada declared, "We are not preaching Hindu religion. While registering the association, I purposely kept this name, 'Krishna Consciousness,' neither Hindu religion nor Christian nor Buddhist religion."

In his April, 1967, New York lectures he remarked, "Although posing as great scholars, ascetics, householders and swamis, the so-called followers of the Hindu religion are all useless, dried-up branches of the Vedic religion." ISKCON, he believed, was the only true exponent of the Vedic faith today. In an interview given for Bhavan's Journal on June 28, 1976, he said, "India, they have given up the real religious system, Sanatana Dharma. Fictitiously, they have accepted a hodgepodge thing which is called Hinduism. Therefore there is trouble."

From here.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Hello,do ISKCON folks consider themselves to be Hindus?I am asking this question after reading the lecture below


From here.

I believe they are Hindu. I think he is right about the word Hinduism being a foreign designation from invaders. It maters not what he says. Iskcon fits easiest into that category. In the last few hundred years it has been the nature of Vaishnava community to be a little more picky in there inclusion of other groups then the rest of the Hindu's.

 

[Satsangi]

My viewpoint is that they believe in Lord Krishna and the BG is also their scripture. They are, by the virtue of their belief in the BG, the Bhagvatam and Lord Krishna, rooted in the Vedas- whether they accept it or not. Hence,they are a part of Sanatana Dharma in that way. The "dried up branches of Vedas" is probably a referrence to people who do not believe in the Anaadi Ishwara and recite the Jnana without having the gnostic knowledge of the Supreme. I have not read much about Srila Prabhupada or the ISKCON though. I did not know that Transcendental Meditation and the Bhramakumaris go at length to say that they are not Hindus!! Finally, it does not matter if anyone believes they are Hindus or not- they are free to believe whatever they want to. The Vedas are eternal, the Scriptures are true and so are the great Rishis and so is the Great Bharat.

Regards,

 

[Valjean]

They dodge and weave when I try to connect them with Hinduism, but they're clearly a rather unorthodox bhakti sect.

 

[Andal]

I am not a member of Iskcon but I do go to their temple and functions (we have a really wonderful temple community here) I don't know how many of them consider themselves Hindu but I consider them Hindu by virtue that they revere the Vedas, Upanishads, SB and BG. You can take darshan at their temples. They take care of deities properly, they respect the sacredness of the Ganga, and they love Krishna. To me these things make them Hindu. And certainly during Gaura-Nitai's times their sankirtan movement was seen as hindu.

In my temple one can purchase murtis and images of not just Krishna, Vishnu, and Ram but also Shiva and the various devis so it seems that although theologically they don't concern themselves with the devas and devis and yet there is a type of cohesion and respect occurring. This signals to me perhaps a shift toward more mainstream Vedic religion

I do agree with Srila Prabhupada that there are a lot of people practicing "Hinduism" but aren't actually practicing Sanatana Dharma but the same could be said about people in other religions. There are some who get it and others who cling to superstition or cultural hierarchies from which they benefit.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Madhuri]

I grew up in ISKON and yes, I considered myself Hindu. I do remember being told that many sects in India had wrong ideas. Sometimes there would be negative comments about 'mayavadis' but also sometimes people would say that 'mayavadis' are simply attracted to Brahman and while it is not the highest truth, it is their eternal abode. So they are not wrong, but they are not the highest or greatest souls. (I'm not quoting directly, btw).

I strongly disagree with many things said by Prabhupada and no longer relate to the above thinking. But yes, we did think of ourselves as Hindus.

I suspect that Prabhupada is saying in the first quote that he did not want to be associated with the Western concept of Hinduism (as he was establishing this religion in the West), probably because in reality there is no 'Hindu' religion. There are simply many religions that are derived from Vedic philosophies. He wanted a movement focussed on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, which is a very specific movement and cannot be dismissed as 'Hinduism'.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Prabhupada was a nice man. I do believe he was not as open minded as most Hindu teachers.

 

[Metempsychosis]

Prabhupada was a nice man.

Yes the older acharyas(like Prabupada) atleast had some kind of Disciple(like they don't smoke or drink)...which some of the modern ones lack.

 

[Andal]

I wonder too if Prabhupada's lack of "open mindedness" had something to do too with the fact that he was trying to teach this to westerners. He came to the US at the height of free love and drugs. People also had only limited exposure to Hinduism and thus maybe had wrong ideas. So he had to come in with a very strict Gaudiya theology to counter the cultural problems he would face in the US.

Just something I've been throwing around in my head.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Yes the older acharyas(like Prabupada) atleast had some kind of Disciple(like they don't smoke or drink)...which some of the modern ones lack.

But his direct disciples did not escape many scandals. This dose reflect badly on his movement. He did not seem to be a great judge of human character.

 

[Metempsychosis]

But his direct disciples did not escape many scandals. This dose reflect badly on his movement. He did not seem to be a great judge of human character.

Yes it is true.But He did not appoint any one as his successor.

 

[dharma_seeker]

There is some controversy about him being poisoned by one of his disciples. Any clarifications?

 

[Andal]

Dharma,

I've heard that before. I don't know if any of it's true but there is a group of Srila's followers who broke off from ISKCON because they believe that no one is guru but Prabhupada. It is these people who claim the original followers poisoned him. I don't know if it's true or not but I feel doubtful about it. Everything I've seen and read is in the genre of conspiracy theories.

Aum Hari Aum!

 

[Falcon108]

ISKCON may or may not concider themselves Hindu. But they should not. Not because Gaudiya Viasnavas dont have the same source of knowledge, ie Vedas and Guruparmpara, but that designations of religion create sectarianism. Relgions are a nessacary evil in this world, because they help with libaration, but they also, like I said, create sectariansm.

Srila Prbhupada was the MOST open-minded. When most Hindus of the time taught not to preach to the "Dog Eaters" of the West, he did so. Because he understood, that we are all spirit souls, and not this body. So everyone should be treated as equal under the eyes of God.

He also didn't want to be pegged into Hinduism or any religion because, he believed in Jiva Dharma. Which means that Krsna Consciousness is a truth for every living creature, including humans, animals, trees, martians...what have you. But in order to create some stability in a society, you have to adobt certain rules and regulations, and those were borrowed, in most part from Hinduism, Viasnavism. But in his open mindedness he even changed those rules in order to help those at a certain time, place and cercumstance.

All glories to all true teachers of God Conscousness!

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Srila Prbhupada was the MOST open-minded. When most Hindus of the time taught not to preach to the "Dog Eaters" of the West, he did so.

I think it has become more and more common since Swami Vivekananda sailed to Chicago and represented India in the 1893 Parliament of World Religions. Many saints have came to the west or had western students. Yogananda, Gandhi, and Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi just to name a few.

 

[Madhuri]

ISKCON may or may not concider themselves Hindu. But they should not.

I think they should for the simple fact that they are.

 

[Stormcry]

I grew up in ISKON and yes, I considered myself Hindu. I do remember being told that many sects in India had wrong ideas. Sometimes there would be negative comments about 'mayavadis' but also sometimes people would say that 'mayavadis' are simply attracted to Brahman and while it is not the highest truth, it is their eternal abode. So they are not wrong, but they are not the highest or greatest souls. (I'm not quoting directly, btw).

I strongly disagree with many things said by Prabhupada and no longer relate to the above thinking. But yes, we did think of ourselves as Hindus.

I suspect that Prabhupada is saying in the first quote that he did not want to be associated with the Western concept of Hinduism (as he was establishing this religion in the West), probably because in reality there is no 'Hindu' religion. There are simply many religions that are derived from Vedic philosophies. He wanted a movement focussed on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, which is a very specific movement and cannot be dismissed as 'Hinduism'.

Unfortunately you don't know anything about iskcon and about veda . Saying bramhan is not the highest ,is just rejecting veda .Veda says bramhan is the highest truthtruth .Btw have you read veda or Upanishads apart from iskcon's non-vedic books ?

Iskconites don't refer veda Upanishads and they call themselves a vedic ! How strange !
Hindu dharma is vedic dharma . Hindus prefer their dharma as sanatana vedic dharma .Outsiders call followers of ved as hindus. The main scripture of hinduism is veda .From veda ,different branches were produced at the time of creation of veda .But all are called as hindu philosophy or vedic philosophy .

As far as iskcon is considered ,In fact , It's a semi vedic sect of Hinduism . Their philosophy is not found in any authentic vedic scriptures like veda ,Upanishads and puranas . You wouldn't find any ' achintya bhedabhed tatva ' there ! So they are semi vedic .


For those who don't know origin of iskcon :

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 New York City by A. C. 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 !