What is your opinion on Hare Krishna?

[StarryNightshade]

There was a HK monk at my schools campus who, for a small donation, was handing out books on his religion. I gave him about 3 dollars and got a decent sized book in return.

I've begun reading it and, while it is interesting, Hare Krishna is definitely not for me. The biggest breaking point being the belief that the founder is an incarnation of Krishna.

What do you think of this religion?

 

[Vinayaka]

Definitely a controversial group, and tons have been written about them. Search on ISKCON, the official name.

 

[Nyingjé Tso]

Vanakkam,

Definitely a controversial group, and tons have been written about them. Search on ISKCON, the official name.

^ this

I have nothing against them, but they sure are controversial. They are generally not very well viewed in my country, as it is considered a sect and thus potentially dangerous for the endoctrinated individuals.

But I've met many ISKON devotees that are very, very good persons ! And others less good. It is like everywhere

Personally it is like everything: I respect them, their choices, they way to be. I just have a different path, as long as they repect this too there is no need to look into each others buisness

Aum Namah Shivaya

 

[Jainarayan]

But I've met many ISKON devotees that are very, very good persons ! And others less good. It is like everywhere

Indeed. George Harrison was a member of ISKCON. He donated one of his homes to ISKCON to be converted to a temple, now known as "the manor".

 

[Vinayaka]

I'm not sure if George was an initiated member, or just an avid supporter. Mind you, I haven't read his detailed bio. But just to clarify, I like ISKCON, as they are brothers and sisters in Hinduism. Been through some karma is all, and there is no denying the controversy aspect.

 

[Maija]

You don't have to agree with the entire philosophy of a sect,their actions, certain specific beliefs, to be inspired- see my thread on Aghori Sect- they terrify me and have methods that i certainly wouldnt use. but i think our path is deepened if we learn from what fuels others.

iskcon inspires me and others by their devotion and in the end they are reason for initial attraction to SD. they lead me to the tree for which there are a thousand branches

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

ISKCON has some up sides. Then have done a lot to promote vegetarianism and have been in some ways a positive influence in popular culture.

But.....They are a very narrow group that tended to be scandal ridden in many of the worst ways possible.

 

[Jainarayan]

I'm not sure if George was an initiated member, or just an avid supporter. Mind you, I haven't read his detailed bio.

True, I'm not sure either. But he was indeed dedicated, at the very least to Lord Krishna. He passed away doing exactly what he said in his song Awaiting on You All: "chanting the names of the Lord and you'll be free..."

 

[Vinayaka]

apparently not ...Was George Harrison a member of ISKCON

 

[Jainarayan]

Well, I'll be... !

Thinking about it, G.H. didn't adopt the lifestyle of the devotees. So this part makes sense, Srila Prabhupada told him that he could benefit the movement more as a "plainclothes devotee".

 

[Madhuri]

There was a HK monk at my schools campus who, for a small donation, was handing out books on his religion. I gave him about 3 dollars and got a decent sized book in return.

I've begun reading it and, while it is interesting, Hare Krishna is definitely not for me. The biggest breaking point being the belief that the founder is an incarnation of Krishna.

What do you think of this religion?

There is a quote in one of their main scriptures (Srimad Bhagavatam) that predicted the birth/appearance of this avatar. That is partly why they believe he is an avatar of Krishna. Even if he isn't though, he was certainly an amazing and saintly person.

By the way, the founder you referred to (Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu) began the Gaudiya Vaishnava movement in the 1400s. However ISKCON was founded by Prabhupada in the 1900s. ISKCON is only one branch of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and tends to be a little more difficult to digest than the other branches.

I think there is good and bad to the Hare Krishnas. They tend to be a bit literal and extreme but at the same time, there is a lot of beauty. They have also done a lot to bring knowledge of Hinduism to the world.

 

[Madhuri]

By the way, which book did they give you?

 

[Madhuri]

George's guru was not a Gaudiya Vaishnava and George practiced Transcendental Meditation, which his son now follows as well. But yes, he did support ISKCON.

 

[StarryNightshade]

By the way, which book did they give you?

The Science of Self-Realization by Swami Prabhupada.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

George's guru was not a Gaudiya Vaishnava and George practiced Transcendental Meditation, which his son now follows as well. But yes, he did support ISKCON.

I heard his wife on NPR. She talked about how he chanted the name of Krishna, while he was being stabbed by a mad man who broke in his house. This gave me a lot more respect for the man.

 

[Maya3]

In my opinion, they are too strict and fundamental.
They don´t believe in evolution either if I have the correct information (?)

Maya

 

[Madhuri]

In my opinion, they are too strict and fundamental.
They don´t believe in evolution either if I have the correct information (?)

Maya

That's true, they are very literal. Maybe completely literal.

I don't actually think their rules are bad but those rules were originally meant for renounced persons but the movement now expects ordinary people to follow them. Not really possible without repression and negative consequences.

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

Yes they are too strict and fundamental. They are actually monestaries that had once tried to have married people and their kids live in. They are old school hard core for sure.
Their rules of strict yoga monestary rules.

The science of self realization book is a collection of debates with different reglious figure of the time. The Swami debates and discusses the vedas yoga and the gita while quoting sanskrit verses as proofs to be back checked.
The old Indian Swami shows off and is very often boldface direct in his interpretations of the sanskrit puranas. He translated tons of sanskrit scriptures into english. The founder of the Hare Krishna school was Chaitanya maha prabhu 1550s. The proof of chaitanya's divinity is relevant for the spread of the maha mantra. HK uphold the Swami prabhupada's bhagavad gita as its bible.

Temple life is meant to help free negative things. But most are repressing their real pupose in life thinling they should devote them selves to temple life when a temporary stay would have been a better plan. I mean this about the HK history of naive communal setbacks.

Did you know that the Indian government honored the founder of the HKs Swami prabhupada by printing a postage stamp used in India? you can google it.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I heavily enjoy Sanatana Dharma and I enjoy Hindus more then I do Muslims as I have never found an open minded Muslim sadly.
Hare Krishna despite the common name it is given by the public is called ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness). Abhay Prabupad was no doubt a man of god and an individual worthy of the title saint. But I do not accept the existence of avatars as a whole. I feel for the Arya Samaj in regards to this issue. I believe in prophets, monism, enlightenment/moksha but I do not accept avatars which is sort of obvious since I am still a Muslim at the end of the day, I may be Dharmic but I'm Muslim nonetheless.
Abhay Prabhupada created ISKCON with good intent although I fear its continuity has become detrimental unto itself. Personally I enjoy the teachings of Prabhupada and I find them inspiring. Numerous theological concepts I do not get along with but I can look past such petty matters.

 

[apophenia]

There is a quote in one of their main scriptures (Srimad Bhagavatam) that predicted the birth/appearance of this avatar. That is partly why they believe he is an avatar of Krishna.

The ISKCON devotees claim that this was written 5000 years ago. Is there any evidence that this is true ?

I think it is a case of making it appear that this was an extraordinary prediction. Scholars are of the opinion that Srimad Bhagavatam was written no earlier than 500 CE.