[Hindus Only] Question for Hindus

[Chakra]

@kalyan, what is your problem? Do you sincerely think that Ramanuja would be pleased by your tone? Vedanta Desika and Vidyaranya had opposing philosophies, but they were great friends. It is one thing to have a fruitful discussion to learn and compare siddhantas, and another thing to outright attack each other. And attacking a maha-bhagavata like Chaitanya?

 

[atanu]

Yes I am well aware. In my analysis, circular logic is how all the Vedas (or any other scripture) get their authority. The Vedas are perfect because they say they are perfect (or someone else says they are perfect). Sabda operates on this basis, but it is not considered a fallacy (at least to Hindus) because the standard of proof is generally common. That is precisely the point I am trying to make to Kalyanji. we place our faith in different schools as per our experiences.I do not regard the statements of the Gaudiya Acharyas as truth because they come in the line of Sri Chaitanya-deva, but rather my experiences have led to my faith unto the Gaudiya Acharyas, and hence I accept them as authoritative. Through their authority I accept Lord Chaitanya. They form my standard of proof. It is disrespectful to attack another school for their conclusions simply because they have a different standard of proof. All fields of knowledge are ground upon assumptions, and thus cannot be proven entirely true. It is experience that forces us to accept or reject the various worldviews. That is the vakhya of the Upanisads, yasya deve para bhaktir, yatha deva tatha gurau tasyaite kathita hy arthah prakasante (Svet.Upanisad)

Of course, being a fine representative of argumentative Indian, I must differ on some aspects. Ha ha.

Veda is non sectarian whereas scripture of sects are not so. Rig Veda, at the outset, states that the Truth is one that sages call by different names. Further, the Veda states that the mind and word return from it.

But some disregard this and impose that certain names only represent the highest Truth. The world is 90% ruled by hatred of this kind. Fortunately Hindus do not kill.

There is a classic case. There is a Gaudiya/ISKCON translation of Svestavatara Upanishad where every occurrence of a certain Deity has been replaced by 'Krishna'. I have often been astounded by the logic employed in these kinds of translations and the stance of many bhaktas who belittle faith of other bhaktas (or of understanding of karma and jnana yogis).

 

[Aupmanyav]

"yasya deve para bhaktir, yatha deva tatha gurau tasyaite kathita hy arthah prakasante"

That, I think ends all discussion. Nitai's guru says something. It is Veda Vakya for him, though it may be an utter lie for the rest of the world. There is no question, no requirement of any further proof as far as Nitai is concerned. All this Veda, Upanishad talk is unnecessary for him. Cool, Nitai, cool.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

@jac515

Shaktism doesn't really care about caste, as we're all viewed as fundamentally equal. However, in practice, that may vary by practitioner in India due to social circumstances, but that's really nothing to do with Shaktism itself. A so-called "untouchable" may be a guru as Mahadevi is in all.

 

[निताइ dasa]

That, I think ends all discussion. Nitai's guru says something. It is Veda Vakya for him, though it may be an utter lie for the rest of the world. There is no question, no requirement of any further proof as far as Nitai is concerned. All this Veda, Upanishad talk is unnecessary for him. Cool, Nitai, cool.

With all due respect prabhuji, if I was like this, I would not have given explanations and scriptural injunctions to back up my claims like I have done in all my posts. I would simply say "my Gurudeva has said so, therefore he is right". No, I haven't never done this, in all my posts I have backed up my claims either with an explanation or scriptural injunctions (even the "yasya deve para bhaktir" come from the Upanishads". Of course I have great respect for scripture. I'm sorry if you think that I'm an idiot follower of my Gurudeva, but I would happily be an idiot servant of a Vaishnavs than the proud scholar of the Vedas life after life. Many many individuals becomes so lost in the philosophical varieties of Vedanta, they forget to practice its teachings. May Lord Nitai smile upon you

sri caitanya prabhum vande
balo'pi yad-anugrahat
taren-nanamata- graha
vyaptam siddhanta-sagaram.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Of course, being a fine representative of argumentative Indian, I must differ on some aspects. Ha ha.

Veda is non sectarian whereas scripture of sects are not so. Rig Veda, at the outset, states that the Truth is one that sages call by different names. Further, the Veda states that the mind and word return from it.

But some disregard this and impose that certain names only represent the highest Truth. The world is 90% ruled by hatred of this kind. Fortunately Hindus do not kill.

There is a classic case. There is a Gaudiya/ISKCON translation of Svestavatara Upanishad where every occurrence of a certain Deity has been replaced by 'Krishna'. I have often been astounded by the logic employed in these kinds of translations and the stance of many bhaktas who belittle faith of other bhaktas (or of understanding of karma and jnana yogis).

Pranam. Yes Prabhu thank you and I respect your view (for us, the Krsna translation is based upon our understanding of the absolute truth in Bhagavatam. Our conclusions draw for there). I am sorry if it seemed like I was belittling the practice of someone else, everything I have done was out of defense against Kalyanji's statements. Jaya Nitai!

 

[Aupmanyav]

With all due respect prabhuji, if I was like this, I would not have given explanations and scriptural injunctions to back up my claims like I have done in all my posts. I would simply say "my Gurudeva has said so, therefore he is right". No, I haven't never done this, in all my posts I have backed up my claims either with an explanation or scriptural injunctions (even the "yasya deve para bhaktir" come from the Upanishads". Of course I have great respect for scripture. I'm sorry if you think that I'm an idiot follower of my Gurudeva, but I would happily be an idiot servant of a Vaishnavs than the proud scholar of the Vedas life after life. Many many individuals becomes so lost in the philosophical varieties of Vedanta, they forget to practice its teachings. May Lord Nitai smile upon you

sri caitanya prabhum vande
balo'pi yad-anugrahat
taren-nanamata- graha
vyaptam siddhanta-sagaram.

Dashavatara means ten and no eleventh. And after Buddha it will be Kalki 327,000 years hence. That is what the scriptures say. Anything else is false.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The eight avataras, Jagannatha, Vekateswara, Vithoba, are all indigenous Gods not mentioned in RigVeda, which have been assimilated in Vishnu.

 

[atanu]

Pranam. Yes Prabhu thank you and I respect your view (for us, the Krsna translation is based upon our understanding of the absolute truth in Bhagavatam. Our conclusions draw for there). I am sorry if it seemed like I was belittling the practice of someone else, everything I have done was out of defense against Kalyanji's statements. Jaya Nitai!

Pranam Nitai

Yes. That is just fine. On the other hand, suppose, the world knows my daughter as 'abc' but to me she is 'Angel'.

The problem starts when some one insists that my daughter must be 'abc' only because he knows her by that name. It is a simple thing that minds holding on to notion of separateness fail to appreciate.

But okay. That is how awareness ripens.

 

[निताइ dasa]

Dashavatara means ten and no eleventh. And after Buddha it will be Kalki 327,000 years hence. That is what the scriptures say. Anything else is false.

Okay. This is how Bhagavatam resolves this conflict. Dasavatar is only a categorization given by certain scriptures (like the Visnu Purana). The list is neither a complete list, nor is it exhaustive. Lord Hari takes many incarnations, these include Lila Avatars (i.e Dasavatars and the list of 25 in Bhagavatam including Mohini), Purusha Avatars, Guna Avatars (like Shiva Shambhu), Shaktyavesha Avatars (like Rshbadeva, Kapiladeva, Prithu Maharaj, Veda Vyasa, Dattatreya) and Yuga Avatars (in colors shukla, rakta, syama and pita respectively). In-fact, Srimad Bhagavatam lists 22 incarnations and at the end of the list concludes:

avatārā hy asaṅkhyeyā
 hareḥ sattva-nidher dvijāḥ
yathāvidāsinaḥ kulyāḥ
 sarasaḥ syuḥ sahasraśaḥ

" brāhmaṇas, the incarnations of the Lord are innumerable, like rivulets flowing from inexhaustible sources of water." (SB 1.3.26)

 

[Aupmanyav]

Now, now. Vishnu Purana is not any ordinary late age contrived Purana. Srimad Bhagawatham was espousing 'advait' view that there are innumerable avataras. These are written by Sage VedaVyasa who himself was an 'amshavatara'. If he knew about Kalki who will come only after 327000 years, he should have said something about others who have been made into 'avataras' of Lord Vishnu. Actually, all Jeevas are but avataras of SrimanNarayana. I suppose with your Achintya Bheda Abheda philosophy, you will agree to that.

 

[DeviChaaya]

Okay. This is how Bhagavatam resolves this conflict. Dasavatar is only a categorization given by certain scriptures (like the Visnu Purana). The list is neither a complete list, nor is it exhaustive. Lord Hari takes many incarnations, these include Lila Avatars (i.e Dasavatars and the list of 25 in Bhagavatam including Mohini), Purusha Avatars, Guna Avatars (like Shiva Shambhu), Shaktyavesha Avatars (like Rshbadeva, Kapiladeva, Prithu Maharaj, Veda Vyasa, Dattatreya) and Yuga Avatars (in colors shukla, rakta, syama and pita respectively). In-fact, Srimad Bhagavatam lists 22 incarnations and at the end of the list concludes:

avatārā hy asaṅkhyeyā
 hareḥ sattva-nidher dvijāḥ
yathāvidāsinaḥ kulyāḥ
 sarasaḥ syuḥ sahasraśaḥ

" brāhmaṇas, the incarnations of the Lord are innumerable, like rivulets flowing from inexhaustible sources of water." (SB 1.3.26)

Nitai das ji, this is a wonderful opinion of yours. Too often I have heard from other Gaudiya Vaishnavs that Krishna only takes the forms of the dasavatars and no other and that is why worshiping any other form of God is wasteful despite each of us being called to different forms.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Aupmanyav ji

That, I think ends all discussion. Nitai's guru says something. It is Veda Vakya for him, though it may be an utter lie for the rest of the world. There is no question, no requirement of any further proof as far as Nitai is concerned. All this Veda, Upanishad talk is unnecessary for him. Cool, Nitai, cool.

use of ''utter lie'' is ....Totaly Unacceptable A lie is a deliberate untruth , a Guru may hold a position or beleif that might not concur with others , .... however this does not make it a lie , ....

 

[निताइ dasa]

Actually, all Jeevas are but avataras of SrimanNarayana. I suppose with your Achintya Bheda Abheda philosophy, you will agree to that.

Hmm, yeah I would agree partly. Acintya Bhedaabheda says that the Jivas are fragmented portions of the Brahmajyoti of Narayan, but cannot be called Avatars. The example of a flame is given. A candle flame can be used to light other candle flames. In this way all the Avatars of Sri Krsna are candle flames, they are completely equal in potency. The jivas however are like sparks emanating from the flame, they are one with the flame in quality, but different in terms of quantity. Just like a drop cannot be an ocean, yet is the same type as an ocean, a Jiva cannot be called Visnu, though coming from Him.

Nitai das ji, this is a wonderful opinion of yours. Too often I have heard from other Gaudiya Vaishnavs that Krishna only takes the forms of the dasavatars and no other and that is why worshiping any other form of God is wasteful despite each of us being called to different forms.

I am happy that is pleases you. My humble pranams. I don't think Lord Hari is selfish. Whomever calls out to Him (in whatever form, or even through another deity) God will respond. It is not like God is sitting there saying "you will only get results if you worship Me in this Form". According to each of our individual spiritual paths we are attracted to a different deity or school, there is nothing wrong with that at all. Spirituality is like a ladder (and yes we may disagree on where our respective philosophies may be located on that ladder), but it is a ladder none-the-less, and everyone is making progress in spiritual life.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram Aupmanyav ji

Dashavatara means ten and no eleventh. And after Buddha it will be Kalki 327,000 years hence. That is what the scriptures say. Anything else is false.

yes this is ten most widely known , .....Bhagavatam lists 24 , ...

Gita speaks of , ...Krsna appearing when so ever he deems nececary , ......

Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion — at that time I descend Myself. To deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium........Bhagavad Gita Ch ..4 V .. 7-8

thus there are numerous forms of Avatara , ...​

The eight avataras, Jagannatha, Vekateswara, Vithoba, are all indigenous Gods not mentioned in RigVeda, which have been assimilated in Vishnu.

Hmmmm ...not so sure about this one , ...but for fear of starting another argument prehaps in another thread, ..?

Bhagavatam lists 24 Avataras , ...Canto 1: Chapter 3: Verses 1-25

Adi Purush Avatar
The Four Kumaras (ChaturSana)
Varaha Avatar (The incarnation as Boar)
Sage Narada Avatar
Nara-Narayana (Twin Sages) Avatar
Kapila Avatar
Dattatreya Avatar
Yagya (Yajna) Avatar
Rishabh Avatar
Prithu Avatar
Matsya Avatar ~ Fish Incarnation
Kurma (Kachchap) Avatar ~ Tortoise Incarnation
Dhanvantari Avatar ~ Lord of Medicine
Mohini Avatar ~ Enchanting Woman
Narasimha Avatar ~ Half Man – Half Lion
Vaman Avatar ~ As a Dwarf
ParshuRama Avatar
Vyas Deva (Vedvyas) Avatar ~ Krishna Dvaipayana
Shri Rama Avatar
Shri BalRama Avatar
Shri Krishna Appearance ~ Summum Bonum Absolute Personality of Godhead
Buddha Avatar
Kalki Avatar

All of the above mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Shri Krishna is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists. The Lord incarnates to protect the theists.
........Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 1, Chapter 3, verses 28​

Whoever carefully recites the mysterious appearances of the Lord, with devotion in the morning and in the evening, gets relief form all miseries of life.
.......Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 1, Ch ..3 v ..29​

 

[Aupmanyav]

A lie is a deliberate untruth , a Guru may hold a position or beleif that might not concur with others , .... however this does not make it a lie , ....

There can only be one truth. So one of the statements s a lie. 'Utter lie' to denote the 'andha bhakti' of some people who do not need any pramana other than what their guru says. Even Lord Buddha says that we should not accept something as truth just because it:

"has been acquired by repeated hearing (anussava), nor upon tradition (paramparā), nor upon rumor (itikirā), nor upon what is in a scripture (piṭaka-sampadāna), nor upon surmise (takka-hetu), nor upon an axiom (naya-hetu), nor upon specious reasoning (ākāra-parivitakka), nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over (diṭṭhi-nijjhān-akkh-antiyā), nor upon another's seeming ability (bhabba-rūpatāya), nor upon the consideration, The monk is our teacher (samaṇo no garū)."

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hmm, yeah I would agree partly. Acintya Bhedaabheda says that the Jivas are fragmented portions of the Brahmajyoti of Narayan, but cannot be called Avatars. The example of a flame is given. A candle flame can be used to light other candle flames. In this way all the Avatars of Sri Krsna are candle flames, they are completely equal in potency. The jivas however are like sparks emanating from the flame, they are one with the flame in quality, but different in terms of quantity. Just like a drop cannot be an ocean, yet is the same type as an ocean, a Jiva cannot be called Visnu, though coming from Him.

That is true. They may be known as 'amshavatara', but not full-fledged avataras. A drop cannot be an ocean. The same is true of all mortals. They are 'amshavataras', but never full avataras. We should not make amshavataras into full-fledged avataras. There is a difference in quality. Even Lord Krishna said in Gita that we should see Him in all things. Nothing wrong with that. Is that right, Nitai Dasa?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Buddha Avatar
Kalki Avatar

Ratiben, see, no avatara, not even an 'amshavatara' between Lord Buddha and Lord Kalki. And I hope you would not say that Sage VedaVyasa, himself an 'amshavatara' - did not know?

 

[निताइ dasa]

That is true. They may be known as 'amshavatara', but not full-fledged avataras. A drop cannot be an ocean. The same is true of all mortals. They are 'amshavataras', but never full avataras. We should not make amshavataras into full-fledged avataras.

Hmm again I would humbly disagree. Amshaavatars (the term as used in Bhagavatam) cannot be applied to any jiva, because they(amsa) come directly from Vaikuntha (from Narayan) not His Brahmajyoti. I believe the term you are looking for is Saktyavesha Avatar (empowered incarnation). Even then Saktyavesha incarnations can only be applied to certain jivas, not all of them.Of course you would disagree with me, as Adwaitins believe that everything is Brahman The main fundamental distinction between our views is that we (Vaishnavs) believe that Lord Krsna and His Avatars cannot fall into Maya (hence why Jivas cannot be called Avatars), while Adwaitins believe that Visnu and His Avatars are Brahman covered by Maya (hence all Jivas can be called Avatars).

Ratiben, see, no avatara, not even an 'amshavatara' between Lord Buddha and Lord Kalki.

The reason Lord Chaitanya is not found in this list, is because this list is describing the 24 Lila Avatars of Narayan. It does not discuss any other (like Purusha or Yuga Avatars). There are four yuga avatars who appear in four different colors in every age. In a white form, Lord Hari appears as Kardama Muni in Satya Yuga. In a red form the Lord appears in Treta Yuga. In the Blackish form (Syama) the lord appears in Dwapara, and finally in the golden form the Lord appears in Kali Yuga (whom we Gaudiyas call Chaitanya).

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. and finally in the golden form the Lord appears in Kali Yuga (whom we Gaudiyas call Chaitanya).

Which book mentions Mahaprabhu as an avatara?