Ask Madhuri a Question about Hinduism

[Parsifal]

Let's revive our true religion and start worshiping our true God.

How do you propose to do this?

Brahman is not meant for discussion in a forum, it is beyond everything. Its pointless and stupid to even talk about Brahman. We can reach up to Hiranyagarbha through our intellect and Brahman is beyond intellectual comprehension. It should not be discussed.

I disagree. I find it very useful for my own understanding of the mysteries, and communicating about them with others, to talk at great length about That of Which Naught Can Be Said. I always preface it with the caveat that anything that's said is strictly a symbol, so that we don't mistake the shadow for the substance, the reflection for the thing in itself. And Brahman doesn't mind at all. :angel2:

 

[Pleroma]

How do you propose to do this?

Like this - http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/comparative-religion/136161-valentinian-monism-advaita-vedanta.html#post3016514

I disagree. I find it very useful for my own understanding of the mysteries, and communicating about them with others, to talk at great length about That of Which Naught Can Be Said. I always preface it with the caveat that anything that's said is strictly a symbol, so that we don't mistake the shadow for the substance, the reflection for the thing in itself. And Brahman doesn't mind at all. :angel2:

A True philosopher knows what it "IS" ontologically and doesn't waste his time speculating it is this or it is that.

 

[paarsurrey]

Is there anything you are confused about, think is weird, are unsure of or are just plain curious about Hinduism? How do Hindu concepts compare with the other main world religions?

I find that people are generally clueless about Hinduism.

Most importantly, I'm bored. So please ask me questions about Hinduism. It may even challenge me!

Who started Hinduism and on what basis?

 

[Madhuri]

Who started Hinduism and on what basis?

That depends on what you mean by 'Hinduism' since Hinduism is not a single religion. Hinduism is many religions started by many different people who based the religions on Vedic understanding. So maybe a better question is, who gave us the Vedas that lead to the development of Hindu religions?

My answer is: God.

On the basis that Divine knowledge should be available to those individuals who are spiritually mature enough to receive it.

 

[Madhuri]

Do you understand what bothers me about this?

I think so. I will explain my understanding very simply and if it turns out I have misunderstood you, please let me know.

The three gunas very simply relate to material nature and personal tendencies. Even a person who is Sattvic is considered to be in Maya, as this is a mode of nature. Truly none of these gunas are 'good' or 'bad' although we certainly associate them with either 'good' or 'bad' (creation vs destruction or purity vs perversion).

Each guna has its various associations. For example, sattva represents construction/creation, rajas represents preservation/maintenance and tamas represents destruction/indifference. These qualities exist in the universe and also within ourselves and they exist in action and as a mode of consciousness.

I am not aware of sattva being translated as 'truth'. 'Purity' is a more common translation, or 'goodness'.

Since we are affected by all 3 modes, it is not strange that rajas is grouped with the other 2. It makes perfect sense that one can be passionate about their sattvic lifestyle or tamasic lifestyle. You can perform sattvic activity with a tamasic, sattvic or rajasic consciousness. You can perform rajasic activity with a sattvic, rajasic or tamasic consciousness. And you can perform tamasic activity with sattvic, rajasic or tamasic consciousness.

If this has not answered your question please let me know. I may have misunderstood.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Ok Madhuri you asked for it. I have some impolite questions. Feel free to pick and choose what you feel comfortable answering:

-Your honest take on your experience with Iskcon.
-How Iskcon differs from the rest of the Gaudiya Vaishnava community?
-I view Vaishnava sects as being the most literalist do you agree with this assessment and how do you deal with it.
-Do you think Impersonalist can become enlightened.
-Your take on premarital sex as a Hindu.

 

[Madhuri]

Ok Madhuri you asked for it. I have some impolite questions.

I can handle anything!

-Your honest take on your experience with Iskcon.

I loved growing up in ISKCON but in my teens I was exposed to a nasty side of it. I realised how extreme and cultish it can be (although I think it has improved somewhat over time)

-How Iskcon differs from the rest of the Gaudiya Vaishnava community?

I haven't witnessed a great deal of difference between each GV sect. But I've only been exposed to ISKCON, the Gaudiya Math (specifically under direction of Narayana Maharaj) and the Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math. I don't think the differences are even worth noting as they are so minor and seem politically motivated.

-I view Vaishnava sects as being the most literalist do you agree with this assessment and how do you deal with it.

I do agree with this statement. I am personally dealing with it by being withdrawn from institutional teachings and trying to figure out truth for myself. I feel that I can be a devotee of Krishna, for example, without having to literally believe the stories in the Puranas or Vedas.

Having said that, I do not completely object to a literalist perspective. I am open to the idea that stories are a mix of literal and allegorical. But I feel that the moral and philosophy behind the stories, literal or not, is the most important aspect and so am not attached to the idea of stories being literally true or not.

-Do you think Impersonalist can become enlightened.

Absolutely. It's kind of ridiculous to think otherwise.

-Your take on premarital sex as a Hindu.

Not recommendable, especially in a non-modern context when it almost inevitably lead to huge problems.

But even with our contraception and liberal attitudes toward marriage and relationships, it is still not recommendable.

In the context of spiritual development, I think that sex for pleasure alone and outside of marriage/commitment is detrimental. However, I do not think that life is black and white. A person can have pre-marital sex and then go on to attaining moksha. A person can have pre-marital sex and find no negative consequences.

I think there is good reason for pre-marital sex to be discouraged, but most importantly we need to realise how it can affect us and others and be prepared to take (karmic) responsibility for our actions if things do go wrong (ie/ unwanted pregnancy, disease, heartbreak etc).

 

[paarsurrey]

That depends on what you mean by 'Hinduism' since Hinduism is not a single religion. Hinduism is many religions started by many different people who based the religions on Vedic understanding. So maybe a better question is, who gave us the Vedas that lead to the development of Hindu religions?

My answer is: God.

On the basis that Divine knowledge should be available to those individuals who are spiritually mature enough to receive it.

From the information you have provided ,I again formulate my question.

How and on whom and when the Vedas were revealed by the One- Creator God?

 

[Madhuri]

From the information you have provided ,I again formulate my question.

How and on whom and when the Vedas were revealed by the One- Creator God?

From a religious perspective, the Vedas are never created. The knowledge is eternal. The first 'humans' or gods in the created universe pass down the knowledge. This has been passed through oral tradition from Master to Student over the course of time until Veda Vyasa compiled it all in writing some 5000 years ago (there is some debate about this dating though).

From an evidence perspective, the Vedas are many thousands of years old with the Rig Veda placed as the oldest at over 10,000 years old. From an evidence placed perspective there is no knowledge as to who wrote it or who it was revealed to.

 

[Vinayaka]

Madhuri, you're doing a very good tactful intelligent job of this. Admirable. Keep it up. I have no questions, sorry.

 

[Shântoham]

I am not aware of sattva being translated as 'truth'. 'Purity' is a more common translation, or 'goodness'.

Pranām Madhuriji & Prophet

Terms like Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas – as well as Māyā and untold others – have no equivalent word in the English language.
The traditional way of understanding the technical terms of a Darśanam is through an exhaustive etymological analysis – unlike you, Madhuriji, I believe, and I mean it with all due respect, that a working knowledge of Sanskrit is indispensable when dealing with the Scriptures – but I doubt that many people here are interested in this type of knowledge.
Therefore we can only search for better – less approximate – definitions. For example:

Tamas = inertia or stasis
Rajas = dynamism
Sattva = equilibrium

From these three definitions – inertia or stasis, dynamism, equilibrium – we can derive all other possible equivalents.

 

[Shântoham]

I haven't witnessed a great deal of difference between each GV sect. But I've only been exposed to ISKCON, the Gaudiya Math (specifically under direction of Narayana Maharaj) and the Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math. I don't think the differences are even worth noting as they are so minor and seem politically motivated.

Pranām Madhuriji & WBY

There are some essential and significant theological differences between iskcon and the various gauḍīya maṭhs – the fall/not fall of the Jīva, for example.
As well as there are essential and significant theological differences between the different Vaiṣṇava Saṁpradāyas – the supremacy of the two armed/four armed form of the Lord, for example.

although I think it has improved somewhat over time

Iskcon is fundamentally a personality cult (ACBVS) – this fact alone prevents any substantial possibility of evolution within iskcon. Iskcon never improves – they only find new ways to do the same things. Old wine in (ever)shiny (ever)new bottles.
As we speak there are plans underway in Mayapur to build the tallest Hare Krishna temple in the world, one of the largest religious buildings ever constructed, and one of the largest religious complexes to be built in last 200 years.
It is a temple dedicated to teaching puranic cosmology – as being literally true – in order to replace modern scientific cosmology, which they consider to be a fraud and without merit. As self defeating as it sounds if you want to convince people that you’re the smartest people in the room – iskcon is seriously intent on pushing puranic cosmology as superior to modern cosmology in the hopes of converting people to that belief system.
ACBVS taught that the modern scientific descriptions of the universe – the cosmology taught by modern science – is a fraud, and that the real structure and makeup of the universe is that which is found in the S. B. and other Purāṇas – e.g. there is only one sun in the universe, all the stars are actually planets, there are beings living on the sun, there is an ocean of yogurt and an ocean of milk, an ocean of ghī, and an ocean of liquor and an ocean of sugarcane juice – surrounding the earth, etc.
Where is the improvement?

 

[Maya3]

What do you mean with fallen?


I laughed out loud when I read that there is only one sun in the universe


Maya

 

[paarsurrey]

From a religious perspective, the Vedas are never created. The knowledge is eternal. The first 'humans' or gods in the created universe pass down the knowledge. This has been passed through oral tradition from Master to Student over the course of time until Veda Vyasa compiled it all in writing some 5000 years ago (there is some debate about this dating though).

From an evidence perspective, the Vedas are many thousands of years old with the Rig Veda placed as the oldest at over 10,000 years old. From an evidence placed perspective there is no knowledge as to who wrote it or who it was revealed to.

I don't get you; How did the first humans got the Vedas? Please elaborate

 

[En'me]

I don't get you; How did the first humans got the Vedas? Please elaborate

The explanation I know if is this:

There were 7 great rishis or sages. They were however "seers" and not "creators". This means, they heard the Vedas (or a portion of them) in a medatative trance and memorised them, since Vedas are believed to exist eternaly in some etheral space, if I remeber correcly.. Later, they passed it on orally to other rishis.

I think that's the answer you want to hear.

Namaste

 

[Shântoham]

What do you mean with fallen?

Pranām Māyādevīji

Iskcon preaches that the origin of the conditioned souls – you, me, and everybody else, in other words – is in the spiritual world in a relationship with Kṛṣṇa and then we fall from the spiritual world out of envy for Kṛṣṇa.
No other Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas teach that. In fact, there is no one in any of the four Vaiṣṇava Saṁpradāyas who teach that. In fact, there are no Hindus who teach that.
It’s basically a Christian concept.
In Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost”, Satan and his crew fall from heaven out of envy.

I laughed out loud when I read that there is only one sun in the universe

The puranic cosmology is quite colorful. But in the same vein are the descriptions of the various hells. Especially if taken literally and factually.

 

[Maya3]

Thats certainly sounds like a Christian concept.

Maya

 

[Vinayaka]

Besides 'hell' in a Christian way, the other carryover in this quasi-conversion of the 60s and later was this incessant need to proseltyse, which, coming from anybody, is still annoying.

 

[Madhuri]

I don't get you; How did the first humans got the Vedas? Please elaborate

There may be different beliefs in the different Hindu religions, but in the Brahma Sampradaya (one of the major religions in Hinduism) it is believed that the Vedas were provided by the creator god Brahma.

 

[paarsurrey]

From a religious perspective, the Vedas are never created.

Then how the Vedas got existed; and came in the human hands?