Same-sex coupling, Sadness and Yeshu Bhakti...

[zenzero]

Friend Nayana,

I am a part of God, we all come from God. However we are not God. We are not supreme beings, we have been covered by illusion and ego which prevents us from 'turely' realising that we are worshippers of God and not the other way around.

Your sentence that we come from God. Where did that *WE* come from.
Either one is part of God or not part of God; kindly clarify this?

Love & rgds

 

[zenzero]

Friend Nayana,

Why is it that you have such an aversion to labels? Language is also a part of God. Without language and labels (such as, "water", "food", "air") we would be completely lost and unable to understand each other let alone understand the teachings of God.

There is no aversion to labels and language is used to label them as air water, food BUT that exactly is what the *delusions* are; they are not separate in ABSOLUTE terms they are all energy including the form [human] we are in or all the forms and no-forms in this universe in existence are all the same and so what one's [mind] sees them are delusions /illusions.

Love & rgds

 

[Madhuri]

Friends,

It is very difficult to get across through minds which even after thousands of years of the advent of humankind is still under delusions; only those who have revolutionised and transcended the mind are free of all delusions and rest leave it to *evolution* for the mind to be free of all delusions.
The whole/absolute/god/krishna/jesus are just forms/labels of the same thing. The appear separately but the energy is the same.
It is only the mind which separates them by only *THINKING* as one STILLS the thoughts [mind] Its all ONE and the worshiper and the worshiped [labels] are ONE. The experiencer [mind] is not there to claim any experience.
If one worships his own mother, he worships the *whole* likewise the act of worshiping is important and not the label besides one worships to still the mind and surrender that mind [ego].

Love & rgds

n.b. Personally did not find a separate *I* and so the present life is only of dropping all those matters [delusions] which got collected by that mind, if any, as that mind too is not *I*and part of the *whole*.

Perhaps the label is important, or the concept that is being worshipped. At least while we are still covered by maya. It will have a different effect on one's consciousness to worship the Devil vs worship Jesus, for example. These labels are representations and we worship a representation of that thing we strive for. By worshipping Krishna, I feel that I am striving to connect with the Whole and to become consumed by Love itself.

Perhaps you think this is also illusion, I do not know. But perhaps having these mind facilities is the point of experiencing the body- it is the vehicle we drive to reach our destination.

As we progress spiritually, then the names may no longer be of such significance. Instead we experience with the core of our Being. Words are no longer necessary. But until then, it is important. In my opinion.

 

[Madhuri]

Friend Nayana,



Your sentence that we come from God. Where did that *WE* come from.
Either one is part of God or not part of God; kindly clarify this?

Love & rgds

I understand Nayana. He is speaking from the perspective of Achintya Bheda Abheda tattva. The simultaneous oneness and difference from God.

 

[Onkara]

As we progress spiritually, then the names may no longer be of such significance. Instead we experience with the core of our Being. Words are no longer necessary. But until then, it is important. In my opinion.

I agree. Every action and thought becomes divine.

 

[savethedreams]

I would say 'marry me' and save yourself the trouble, I'll accept any religion that you have well almost, lol.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

yes, one is free to hold on and be attached with any name/label one wishes till one's mind feels free of it. The matters discussed are only of what it is when the mind is free of all attachments which is what all religions / paths / ways like each individual to BE!

Love & rgds

 

[Gaura Priya]

I think you should really think about what is important to you. I have seen first hand people enetering relationships with others who dislike their religion. It never ends well, one always compromises for the other. Religion is something personal and deep, it trancends this material realm and all our attatchments. I think it would be better to not go into a marriage that you can't fully commit to. Mentally and spiritually

Thank you for this.

As I have stated earlier, he told me that he will never ask me to change my religion, and would respect my choices. That being said, I was born and raised in the Christian religion, so much of it is not unfamiliar to me. I will always understand Vishnu-tattva to be absolutely superior and are the eternal Lord (Krishna, Vishnu, Narayana), as Jehovah is in the Christian conception. I am not changing my beliefs, and will always hold onto Krishna consciousness, read my shastra, do my japa, visit the closest Vaishnava temple regularly, wear tilaka with gopi-chandan or water, etc. I am only changing the externals so as to make him more comfortable, and perhaps open his mind to the philosophy of Vaishnavism.

But, Zenzero is right in this case:

Personal understanding is that SANATAN DHARMA is not about any particular way/path/religion.

It is essentially to follow dharma and one practicing household dharma as a householder is following dharma and even following jesus is following a way/dharma.

Sanatana Dharma is eternal, and there will always be variations. I have even studied the Book of Mormon again and have accepted it as a completely possible Christian revelation (since it speaks of the teachings of Lord Jesus, and is simpler than what the Latter Day Saint churches have complicated). Just like how the Brahma-Samhita has as much criticism as a possible invention of Sriman Mahaprabhu, and yet it is still accepted by every Gaudiya Vaishnava as Scripture, so do I see the Book of Mormon.

So, in conclusion, dont let any earthy love take you away from dear Lord Krsna. Remember all love here is temporary, but the divine love between you and Krsna is eternal. Which one sounds better?

Thank you, Krsna Dasa, for your concern.

He is a very nice boy; you might even like him, lol. He is a pure vegetarian (no meat, fish or eggs), he does not gamble, sex will be saved until after marriage and regulated, and he does not do any intoxicants of any kind (caffeine, alcohol, or nicotine). And I do love the Christian culture, since I was raised with it, so that is not too much of a problem.

I am honest that I do want to have a husband to serve, so I can serve him as good as the Supreme Absolute Truth Himself. I have always wanted to be a homemaker and be able to serve my husband since childhood, and thus I am trying to utilise my senses in a service mood; it is very difficult conversely to find another devotee who has a good personality, gay, and also committed into a marriage-relationship. After all, I can not keep on being single like a 'brahmachari.' I wish to get married while I am young...

As he is a Latter-Day Saint (who has resigned from the church and is attending an Anglican church, although still internally Mormon), however, I will never accept that Jesus should be worshipped as a demigod (since Mormons do believe that Jesus is a god), or as Jehovah Himself... he is always to me the Son of Jehovah God (Biblical Unitarianism), and a Saviour for the Christian religion.

And my gosh, don't get me started on the conception of Yehovah in the Tanakh (Old Testament, Scripture of the Jews)... There is a BIG reason why I have accepted the Vaishnava conception of Krishna as the Supreme Absolute Beauty!

And Bhaktivinod Thakur was very liberal. He imagined a Vaishnavism free from the influences of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Sikhism, and even Vaishnavism itself! He saw it as a universal, something which every soul in every religion has. Jesus, according to him, taught the blessing of Vatsalya rasa to the masses, and he is a pure devotee of the Lord, just like Muhammad and Abraham.

So Vaishnavism in Christian culture? It's a work in progress...

Anyways, I can't wait to perform a Yeshu Puja, complete with Yeshu-prasadam... it seems like a wonderful compromise of the Vedic way of life with Yeshuji Maharaj (with my personal altar to Sri Gaurachandra in another place in the house)! And he (my lord and my god... my future husband) would be very happy with me.

Hinduised Christianity looks pretty good too, lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLZwVzXEmpw

 

[Gaura Priya]

I would say 'marry me' and save yourself the trouble, I'll accept any religion that you have well almost, lol.

If only I met you a few months before, hehehe.

Although I am a pretty high strung individual in itself...

 

[Shaiva]

Friend Nayana,



Your sentence that we come from God. Where did that *WE* come from.
Either one is part of God or not part of God; kindly clarify this?

Love & rgds

The philosophy of GV is much different from your philosophy. We are not trying to give up attachments, but change our attachments from material ones to Krsna. We are not trying to eliminate desires, but to stop matieral desires and only have the desire to serve Krsna. This isnt a matter of thought or no thought, but a matter of the subject of thought. This isnt a matter of desire or no desire, but the subject of the desire. Those things, in themselves, are not bad. But its when we focus them on matter that they become bad and cause suffering.

And who is this "WE", it is the Atma. We dont believe in some advaitic philosophy and believe that we are to dissolve into some oneness and be still for eternity. One reason why I see this is because look at a dead body. Pretty inactive eh? But look at a living body, it is full of life and energy and is always doing something. The difference is the SOUL. The Soul is not supposed to be still or be silent, its nature is activity. The Sanatan-Dharma of the soul is to serve, not to just BE. Otherwise nothing would get done. Just serve for a few moments, serve anything and feel the bliss. Its so nice to serve. Rupa Gosvami once asked Sri Caitanya, what is the svarupa of the soul? Sri Caitanya replied that the svarupa or real position of the soul is to serve.

Comming on here and telling followers of GV that we are deluded is not too good. Doing so on your part shows your delusion. I have found that the business of egolessness is one of the most egotistical of them all. Be careful.

 

[Madhuri]

The philosophy of GV is much different from your philosophy. We are not trying to give up attachments, but change our attachments from material ones to Krsna.

I'd just like to specify something about Krishna's teachings. We are indeed trying to give up all attachments. That is because attachment and love are two different things. By surrendering to Krishna, we are giving up attachments. We are replacing them with Bliss (love). The desire for service that you mentioned is entirely a product of love. Attachment is always selfish, and that is the opposite of love

 

[Shaiva]

I'd just like to specify something about Krishna's teachings. We are indeed trying to give up all attachments. That is because attachment and love are two different things. By surrendering to Krishna, we are giving up attachments. We are replacing them with Bliss (love). The desire for service that you mentioned is entirely a product of love. Attachment is always selfish, and that is the opposite of love

Thank you Madhuri. Attachment in this case is a translation of the word Asakti in which you become attached to Krsna and cant stand to be away from Him and you are always having a feeling of service towards Him. I guess another translation could be love, but I try to keep in mind that the translation of the word is never perfect. So attachment could hold another connotation in the english language then Asakti does in sanskrit, but that does not mean that they are different in denotation.

(7) Asakti (attachment) -- When one's taste becomes very thick and mature, one arrives to the stage of attachment. In the stage of ruci, engagement in devotion is the dominant object of taste, but in the stage of asakti, the Lord Himself becomes the dominant object of taste. In the stage of ruci, some effort is required for focusing the mind on the Lord, but in the stage of asakti, this paramount absorption comes about naturally and without separate endeavours.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Comming on here and telling followers of GV that we are deluded is not too good. Doing so on your part shows your delusion.

I do not see this as the Intent of his post.

 

[Shaiva]

I do not see this as the Intent of his post.

Because Zenzero said this to Nayana:

Friend Nayana,

Yes, that is the problem with your mind which is filled with delusions and needs to be cleared and those whose minds have no delusions knows all are just labels.

Love & rgds

Maybe I misinterpreted, but I see this as Zenzero is saying Nayana's mind is deluded becuase be believes in the "label" of Krsna. I have no harmful intent in saying what I did.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Comming on here and telling followers of GV that we are deluded is not too good. Doing so on your part shows your delusion. I have found that the business of egolessness is one of the most egotistical of them all. Be careful.

I do not think the post by Zenzero intended to call anyone deluded. I think you misunderstood his point.

And you are right the path of egolessness can be dangerous. A few small experiences can lead a hug ego. The path of Tantra also can be full of dangers do to giving full reign to your desires. The path of bhakti is also hard. It might be the easiest straight path but many Bhaktas fall pray to being religious bigots. All paths are like walking on the razors edge.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Because Zenzero said this to Nayana:



Maybe I misinterpreted, but I see this as Zenzero is saying Nayana's mind is deluded becuase be believes in the "label" of Krsna. I have no harmful intent in saying what I did.

Zenzero is not given to calling others names. (unfortunately some times I do:sad4 His path is very different then yours so this sometimes creates differnces. If you notice the GV folks (old timers on this dir) did not seem to take offense to what he said.

 

[tomato1236]

Yeah, this is bizarre. First of all, marry someone who doesn't mind that you believe as you do. Second of all, if he's marrying a guy, he's acting in opposition to the teachings of his church, so to expect you to adhere to the religion he isn't interested in adhering to is ridiculous. Thirdly, you don't live mormon just because your spouse wants you to. It doesn't work like that. Mormonism is highly demanding of its adherents and if you don't honestly believe the doctrine, this will be very difficult. Fourthly, this is just fishy all around. Have you even met the guy?

Oh. I just read the thread. All these questions were answered. Ok. Well good luck.

 

[Gaura Priya]

Yeah, this is bizarre. First of all, marry someone who doesn't mind that you believe as you do. Second of all, if he's marrying a guy, he's acting in opposition to the teachings of his church, so to expect you to adhere to the religion he isn't interested in adhering to is ridiculous. Thirdly, you don't live mormon just because your spouse wants you to. It doesn't work like that. Mormonism is highly demanding of its adherents and if you don't honestly believe the doctrine, this will be very difficult. Fourthly, this is just fishy all around. Have you even met the guy?

Oh. I just read the thread. All these questions were answered. Ok. Well good luck.

a) Firstly, unfortunately in this world, LGBT devotees are very scarce, let alone those who are out of the closet. In my organisation, Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math (SCS Math), many devotees are married with people of different backgrounds or beliefs, so that is not too much of a problem. Plus, this man is already following our regulative principles, which is 1) no meat eating (meat, fish or eggs), 2) no gambling, 3) no intoxication (alcohol, caffeine, or nicotine), 4) no sex outside of marriage, and 5) not accumulating too much wealth.

Hare Krishnas and Mormons have similar social values, it seems. Plus, he doesn't mind me visiting the temple or doing an arti ceremony to Jesus.

2) Because of Boyd Packer's speech in the General Conference on the sickness and abomination of homosexuals, he mustered enough strength to hand in his resignation letter about a week ago. He is still adhering to his belief in restoration Christianity, which does not necessarily mean that he must be attached to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to believe. I am not part of ISKCON (the International Society for Krishna Consciousness), but that does not make me any less of a Vaishnava.

The existence of churches outside the LDS Church (Community of Christ, Church of Jesus Christ, Church of Christ (Temple Lot), etc. are a witness that one can still bear testimony to the Book of Mormon, and the prophet Joseph Smith, without the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

3) Relationships are constantly about learning to help one another and giving in when necessary. Having read the anti-feminist book "Fascinating Womanhood" which gives self-help for Christians in a traditional homemaking/breadwinning dynamic (and which the writer is also part of the CoJCoLDS), I still can hold onto my Vaishnava principles and able to share in Mormon cultural values as well.

But then again, the Dharmic religions are not 'black and white' as the Abrahamic religions are. Sanatana Dharma, or the eternal religion/duty/occupation/way of life is something that naturally evolves in time, place or circumstance (kaladeshapatra). The core Vedic teachings are the same, but the context in which one applies such values differ according to the culture.

4) I will be meeting him come November. Wish me luck! Besides, all relationships, at least in the traditional Gaudiya Vaishnava sense of the term, should always lead towards a long-term monogamous marriage relationship -- otherwise, such a relationship would only be for sense gratification and not edifying for spiritual life, nor for Krishna Himself (or Elohim, as you call Him). I Skype with him doing Bible studies and whatnot four times a week, plus, chatting every day.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

no intoxication (alcohol, caffeine, or nicotine),

No Chai !!!!

Thats just down right non Hindu.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,

Have nothing personal against/for anyone.
We are all ONE!
The *YOU* mentioned to Nayana is not the person Nayana but the mind which is deluded and does not allow Nayana [the consciousness]to see the point raised clearly that all names are labels and since everything is one it makes no difference in whatever label [name] the mind chooses.
Zenzero, Nayana, Wannabe, etc. etc. are also labels to understand and indicate the consciousness that lies within that form which is the same consciousness that lies elsewhere in every forms and no-forms.
Besides let us also remember that when one points a finger at another [egoistically] then 4 fingers point towards the person himself and here there is no individual found totally separated from the *whole*.
So, if friend Nayana is hurt then am four times hurt and already that one word has been misunderstood and reacted through more number of posts on this thread and where actual RESPONSES/ UNDERSTANDING are called for have fallen on deaf ears [unconsciousness].

Love & rgds