what is hinduisms highest priority

[atmarama]

Friend atmarama,

Thank you and understand what it means.
Personally it simply means one's interaction with everyone and everything else as parts of Brahman in personalized forms and this is never denied.
However like to add that Personalized forms too change and one should not be attached to any particular form as any attachment is a barrier.
Am sure that you understand that humans evolved and that the form of human including Krishna's will not be there in future as evolution will change that.
The choice is individual's own and if one wishes to be attached with the form of Krishna and be devoted to that form is fine as long the individual knows that he himself is not a separated form.

Love & rgds

Dear Zenzero,

Krishna's personal form is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. It is unchanging. The human body was made in the image of the Lord as it states in the Bible. Here are three verses from Sri Brahma Samhita explaining a bit more. Here is the link to Bramha Samhita: Sri Brahma-samhita Chapter 5


BS 5.1: Kṛṣṇa who is known as Govinda is the Supreme Godhead. He has an eternal blissful spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and He is the prime cause of all causes.

BS 5.33: I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who is inaccessible to the Vedas, but obtainable by pure unalloyed devotion of the soul, who is without a second, who is not subject to decay, is without a beginning, whose form is endless, who is the beginning, and the eternal puruṣa; yet He is a person possessing the beauty of blooming youth.

BS 5.40: I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, whose effulgence is the source of the nondifferentiated Brahman mentioned in the Upaniṣads, being differentiated from the infinity of glories of the mundane universe appears as the indivisible, infinite, limitless, truth.

 

[atmarama]

But, in the end, Krishna says to drop all Dharmas and simply surrender to Him (18.66)

I am thinking about converting to Gaudiya Vaishnavism, if I do I will be very very liberal. Doesnt Sri Caitanya say that the only religious principal in this day and age is Chanting? Yes, He does in the Caitanya Caritamrita. He does not say, go out and look superior! He doesnt say, put down others. Srila Prabhupada even said that a devotee of Krishna should think of Himself as most fallen, not an elitist. Sri Caitanya just wants us to love God and His process is Chanting, thats all! I really dislike how ISKCON went down hill and has turned into what it is, but it shouldnt pull down all of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. I have great respect for Srila Prabhupada, without Him I would not know what Gaudiya Vaishnavism is, but I dont like what ISKCON has become. I believe that Gaudiya Vaishnavism is apart of Hinduism, unlike ISKCON-ites believe. I dont believe that Krishna is the only way, like the followers of ISKCON believe. To me, just love God either threw meditation, chanting, or however you feel is right, and God will accept. He wants your LOVE! Not for you to call others names and put them down, we are all sons and daughters of God, we should love eachother like so too!

Hare Krishna! I understand many of your sentiments, but feel I need to say something. Although some/many within ISKCON may act as you have said, there are always those who cannot be boxed as simply. We should remember that every organization has its problems. I happen to be a member of ISKCON for two reasons, the first is my attraction to Srila Prabhupada and the purity of his teachings. The second is that due to Srila Prabhupada's mercy I found my spiritual master, who happens to be in ISKCON... Although I consider myself very liberal. Somehow Krishna reciprocates with His devotees no matter which institution. Actually the institution is external. Bhakti is what counts as you mentioned. Krishna Consciousness is one, although we perceive so many different organizations/institutions. The separateness is due to the influence of Kali. There will always be sincere and insincere followers in every group. So let us chant and perfect our lives - I dream of uniting the fractured Vaisnava community around the world. Putting Krishna in the centre just think how wonderful things could be... We should remember that the society is there to nourish the devotees, not the other way around.

Haribol friend
atmarama

 

[atanu]

You would be of the traditionalist school, then.

But you ignore the fact that identical states of expanded consciousness/union have been reported by practitioners of various physical (hatha) or breathing (pranayam) exercises, as well as the usage of various pharmaceuticals -- peyote, soma, ayahuasca, psilocybin, &c.

Namaste Seyorni

Satsangi has clarified that the Turya is not describable and reportable. Only criteria, IMO,which can be individually verified by oneself, is the alteration of one's state of mind that happens when in proximty to a genuine yogi, who is abiding in Turya. Genuine yogis, when engaged in the world as a teacher etc., have the power to give peace and to direct lives of others -- mostly towards auspcious directions.

Whereas a mere experiencer of a state induced by drugs has no such competence. Although, I agree that there are traditions wherein entheogens are administered under supervision to practitioners to help them break out of the mental prison/constructs.

Regards
Om Namah Shivaya

 

[zenzero]

Friend Atmaram,

I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, whose effulgence is the source of the nondifferentiated Brahman mentioned in the Upaniṣads, being differentiated from the infinity of glories of the mundane universe appears as the indivisible, infinite, limitless, truth.

You miss the point.
Krishna as worshiped is a form like Kali as a form was worshiped by Ramakrishna and finally Totapuri guided Ramakrishna to get rid of his attachment to the form of Kali.

Your above quote states *I* worship; where is the question of worshipping unless you are a separate entity which your mind has accepted???
Personally do not find the *I* so nor the necessity of worshipping any godhead as am part of that ONE in a form and if the mind carries any disillusions they get lifted as soon as the come in conscious form as all disillusions are unconscious form.

As mentioned before no path is the path followed and wish you all the best to the path you follow! But whatever you follow first it is necessary to understand who is this *I* that is following anything???

Love & rgds

 

[atmarama]

You miss the point. There is simaltaneous oneness and difference. You cannot deny we are "different"persons? Just see, we are discussing/debating differing viewpoints...

 

[zenzero]

Friend atmaram,

The point is nether missed by this consciousness or that as both are one, what appears as separate individuals are perceptions created by the minds which are covered with disillusions and once that veil of maya is lifted its all oneness.
Personally do not find differences in this discussions to be of any differences but it is all talking to oneself that is taking place and find only the veil of maya strong not to get lifted which has already been discussed earlier.

Love & rgds

 

[atmarama]

Friend atmaram,

The point is nether missed by this consciousness or that as both are one, what appears as separate individuals are perceptions created by the minds which are covered with disillusions and once that veil of maya is lifted its all oneness.
Personally do not find differences in this discussions to be of any differences but it is all talking to oneself that is taking place and find only the veil of maya strong not to get lifted which has already been discussed earlier.

Love & rgds

Hi zenzero,

your words = nothingness . but that is the ultimate "goal" of zen I suppose - nothing

haribol

 

[Bhagavata]

Hare Krishna! I understand many of your sentiments, but feel I need to say something. Although some/many within ISKCON may act as you have said, there are always those who cannot be boxed as simply. We should remember that every organization has its problems. I happen to be a member of ISKCON for two reasons, the first is my attraction to Srila Prabhupada and the purity of his teachings. The second is that due to Srila Prabhupada's mercy I found my spiritual master, who happens to be in ISKCON... Although I consider myself very liberal. Somehow Krishna reciprocates with His devotees no matter which institution. Actually the institution is external. Bhakti is what counts as you mentioned. Krishna Consciousness is one, although we perceive so many different organizations/institutions. The separateness is due to the influence of Kali. There will always be sincere and insincere followers in every group. So let us chant and perfect our lives - I dream of uniting the fractured Vaisnava community around the world. Putting Krishna in the centre just think how wonderful things could be... We should remember that the society is there to nourish the devotees, not the other way around.

Haribol friend
atmarama

I agree and I do know that though ISKCON has its insincere followers, there are many who are pure. But the GBC has decided to change Prabhupadas books, the Ritviks are instead trying to get their own devotees, and many of the fundamental parts of ISKCON are not how Prabhupada wanted them to be. I LOVE Prabhupada, and I love what He wanted ISKCON to be, but the fundamentals (GBC, Ritvik, Book Changes) are just too skewed now. I would join another Gaudiya Vaishnava organization, but I will never loose my respect for Prabhupada and His dreams, which I still think can come true if we keep trying.

 

[Bhagavata]

Friend Atmaram,



You miss the point.
Krishna as worshiped is a form like Kali as a form was worshiped by Ramakrishna and finally Totapuri guided Ramakrishna to get rid of his attachment to the form of Kali.

Your above quote states *I* worship; where is the question of worshipping unless you are a separate entity which your mind has accepted???
Personally do not find the *I* so nor the necessity of worshipping any godhead as am part of that ONE in a form and if the mind carries any disillusions they get lifted as soon as the come in conscious form as all disillusions are unconscious form.

As mentioned before no path is the path followed and wish you all the best to the path you follow! But whatever you follow first it is necessary to understand who is this *I* that is following anything???

Love & rgds

Thats what you believe, we dont. We believe in the words of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Oh, and just because you done use the letter "I" when you express something other then others egos, doesnt make you look egoless. I dont think an Egoless person would ever deride another persons path, whether dual or non-dual. Didnt Ramakrishna, whom you talk about above, say that you must first understand the Dual before you can understand the Non-Dual?

 

[Riverwolf]

The Blessed Lord said:
"Those I consider as the most perfect in Yoga, who, with their minds fixed intently on Me in steadfast love, worship Me with absolute faith."
-Swami Tapasyananda translation

Sri Krishna:
Those who set their hearts on me and worship me with unfailing devotion and faith are more established in yoga.
-Eknath Easwaran translation

Shri Krishna:
Those whose minds are fixed on me in steadfast love, worshiping me with absolute faith. I consider them to have the greater understanding of yoga.
-Swami Prabhavanada/Christopher Isherwood translation

Yet in all these translations Krishna Himself refers to "Me". If Krishna says Me surely He means Himself personally??? Sure He goes on to say that those who worship the impersonal feature will finally/eventually get to Him. But the question here is what is the highest goal...

...I should stop it here, as debates aren't allowed in DIRs, even between members of the same religion.

Wanna take this to the debates section? I'd really like to continue.

 

[Riverwolf]

Hi zenzero,

your words = nothingness . but that is the ultimate "goal" of zen I suppose - nothing

haribol

"I have gained nothing from supreme enlightenment. It is for that reason it is called supreme enlightenment."
-The Buddha.

 

[zenzero]

Friend atmaram,

Thats what you believe, we dont. We believe in the words of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Oh, and just because you done use the letter "I" when you express something other then others egos, doesnt make you look egoless. I dont think an Egoless person would ever deride another persons path, whether dual or non-dual. Didnt Ramakrishna, whom you talk about above, say that you must first understand the Dual before you can understand the Non-Dual?

It will be a pleasure if you can bring out which words made you feel such; would surely try and dispel the MYTHS created here!

What Ramakrishna said, have never been memorized [as that is for parrots] but the essence is that he reached the same state through practice of seven religions to demonstrate that all religions / paths are ways to reach the same state.

When you really know who *YOU* are then the whole *PLAY / MAYA will be a clear reflection like the moon on a still lake and for that one needs to still the mind either through devotion as you are doing or directly by bringing watchfulness as personal am doing. Only when the MIND is STILL does one reach the state of samadhi /satori / etc.
One has to understand THAT even those who take the path of devotion.

Once again, best wishes on your devotion to your devotion.

Love & rgds

 

[zenzero]

Friend atmaram,

The word Zen is a word that evolved through cultures it traveled through; however the meaning remains the same.
The word and meaning of ZEN is *DHYAN* which went to China in the form of Bodhidharma and there Chinese pronounced it *CHAN* and slowly after reaching Japan the word simply became ZEN.
Zen has no goals it is simply to be in dhyan at all times to be HERE-NOW.
Neither is there any pat not any future where timelessness of existence is concerned of which one is simply a part of.

Love & rgds

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Yet in all these translations Krishna Himself refers to "Me". If Krishna says Me surely He means Himself personally??? Sure He goes on to say that those who worship the impersonal feature will finally/eventually get to Him. But the question here is what is the highest goal...

This is the problem with this extremely narrow way of looking at the teachings of your Lord Krishna. The commentaries on the Gita are to many to count. Each school of thought has its own way of looking at it. So the Gita contains parts of truths from many differing traditions. The Gita cannot be seen as a systematic philosophy of just one Indian Religion but an embodiment of many of them.

In many Hindu Scriptures conflicting ideas are side by side. (The most simple Proof of this in the Mahabharata you find arguments for and against eating meat) The Gita is no exception to this rule. The Gita teaches a spirit of harmony and tolerance and not opposition and sectarianism. To turn the Gita in to a text of bigotry and division is disrespectful to the teachings of the Lord Krishna.

You should also remember that it was the great Advaita Acharya Adi Sankara that gave the Gita its place of importance in the Hindu scriptures.

There has been much interpolation of the Gita because the ancient Hindu's did not seem to be as careful with it as parts of the Vedas. This might be way it is not put on the same level of sanctity as the Vedas.

 

[Bhagavata]

This is the problem with this extremely narrow way of looking at the teachings of your Lord Krishna. The commentaries on the Gita are to many to count. Each school of thought has its own way of looking at it. So the Gita contains parts of truths from many differing traditions. The Gita cannot be seen as a systematic philosophy of just one Indian Religion but of all of them.

In many Hindu Scriptures conflicting ideas are side by side. (The most simple Proof of this in the Mahabharata you find arguments for and against eating meat) The Gita is no exception to this rule. The Gita teaches a spirit of harmony and tolerance and not opposition and sectarianism. To turn the Gita in to a text of bigotry and division is disrespectful to the teachings of the Lord Krishna.

You should also remember that it was the great Advaita Acharya Adi Sankara that gave the Gita its place of importance in the Hindu scriptures.

There has been much interpolation of the Gita because the ancient Hindu's did not seem to be as careful with it as parts of the Vedas. This might be way it is not put on the same level of sanctity as the Vedas.

I dont see any contradictions in the Gita, sure in some places Krishna says that you should meditate, serve others, etc. But in the end, Krishna says that one should just surrender to Him (18.66). When Krishna says "Surrender to Me" who else is He talking about? I agree with Atmaram here, when I say look at ME I dont mean look at the door. If Krishna says "Surrender to Me" surely He means for us to surrender to Him, not to other Gods because he is Svayam Bhagavan, Parapurusha, the source of all. Is this not what it says in the Gita?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I dont see any contradictions in the Gita, sure in some places Krishna says that you should meditate, serve others, etc. But in the end, Krishna says that one should just surrender to Him (18.66). When Krishna says "Surrender to Me" who else is He talking about? I agree with Atmaram here, when I say look at ME I dont mean look at the door. If Krishna says "Surrender to Me" surely He means for us to surrender to Him, not to other Gods because he is Svayam Bhagavan, Parapurusha, the source of all. Is this not what it says in the Gita?

Yes, he does say that and it is a path to God. He was talking in the chapter of devotion. So yes for the devottee surender is the key point to spiritual practice.

Look at this verse.

Supreme Bliss wells up in a Yogi, who is tranquil in mind, whose passions are subdued, who is free from impurities and who is in the Brahmic state.
-Gita 6:27

This verse comes after the LORD talks about control of the mind. This leads to the highest bliss.

The LORD in the Gita give us many paths. All of them leads to Him. Brahman, Krishna, Shiva, Kali or Jesus. Yours is not the only path or even the best path for all people.

Whosoever worship me through whatsoever path, I verily accept and bless them in that way. Men everywhere follow my path.
Gita 4:11

Again the Vedas trumps the Gita. The Gita is only true as long as it is consistent with the Vedas due to the fact that much has been changed in this text in later times. Very old texts have 745 verses and todays Gita has 700.

The Artharva Veda says

Ekam jyotir bahudha bibhati

The one light appears in diverse forms.

To practice any path one must have both devotion and knowledge.

 

[Bhagavata]

Yes, he does say that and it is a path to God. He was talking in the chapter of devotion.

He actually said that in the conclusion of the Bhagavad Gita, which is chapter 18. Krishna just gave to Arjuna many ways of getting to God. Karma, Dhyana, Samkhya, and others. And then, in the end, he says for Arjuna to DROP IT ALL and simply surrender to Him. To me, what Krishna is saying here is that complete surrender to God is the direct way to God Consciousness.

Yours is not the only path or even the best path for all people.

Never said it was. Look, I respect all paths, but I feel that the path that Sri Caitanya mapped out is the best for me and the easiest in this day and age to attain God Consciousness. Its that simple to me. In the Adi Lila of the Caitanya Caritamrta, it is said "'In this Age of Kali there is no religious principle other than the chanting of the holy name, which is the essence of all Vedic hymns. This is the purport of all scriptures.' (Adi 7.74) That is why I love Gauidya Vaishnavism, because of the simplicity of the path towards God Consciousness.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

He actually said that in the conclusion of the Bhagavad Gita, which is chapter 18. Krishna just gave to Arjuna many ways of getting to God. Karma, Dhyana, Samkhya, and others. And then, in the end, he says for Arjuna to DROP IT ALL and simply surrender to Him. To me, what Krishna is saying here is that complete surrender to God is the direct way to God Consciousness.

Yes it is. Adi Sankara taught the same thing.

Never said it was. Look, I respect all paths, but I feel that the path that Sri Caitanya mapped out is the best for me and the easiest in this day and age to attain God Consciousness. Its that simple to me. In the Adi Lila of the Caitanya Caritamrta, it is said "'In this Age of Kali there is no religious principle other than the chanting of the holy name, which is the essence of all Vedic hymns. This is the purport of all scriptures.' (Adi 7.74) That is why I love Gauidya Vaishnavism, because of the simplicity of the path towards God Consciousness.

I am glad you found your path.

 

[Bhagavata]

Yes it is. Adi Sankara taught the same thing.

I know many Gaudiya Vaishnavas may not say it, but I do have deep respect for Adi Shankara. Its just that Advaita is just not for me, perhaps I am not advanced enough to understand it.

I am glad you found your path.

Thanks!

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

I dont see any contradictions in the Gita, sure in some places Krishna says that you should meditate, serve others, etc. But in the end, Krishna says that one should just surrender to Him (18.66). When Krishna says "Surrender to Me" who else is He talking about? I agree with Atmaram here, when I say look at ME I dont mean look at the door. If Krishna says "Surrender to Me" surely He means for us to surrender to Him, not to other Gods because he is Svayam Bhagavan, Parapurusha, the source of all. Is this not what it says in the Gita?

I agree Krishna says to surrender to Him. In the Tripura Rahasya the Divine Mother says that when she is pleased with an Devotee she gives all knowledge.

The Vedas are clear all the Gods are One.

Later on it in the same text (Mahabhrata) it was the Lord Krishna Himself gave the world the Shiva Sahasranama.(1000 names of Shiva) In it Krishna called Shiva the Substance of All, cause of All, and all of existance. Are Krishna and Shiva different Gods ? No they are not.

In the Gita he says He is all there is.

In the Devi Suktam (from the Rig Veda) A woman Rshi who is the daughter of Sage Ambrunar. Said that she was the Devi Vak and that

I am the Queen of the Universe; ... I am the all-knowing one and the prime one among the worshippable deities. I enter many bodies as the Atma, taking various forms and with different manifestations, in various ways. Hence, the Devas have incorporated me in various places.

That one who eats food, who sees, breathes, and hears whatever is said, he does all that only through me (my powers). Those who do not understand me, die. O dear one ! (to the worshipper or devotee), hear this singing of mine with concentration... I am the One worshipped by the Devas and the earthly beings.

like William Shakespeare said.
What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.


Vak, Shiva and Krishna are all the same.