In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Jaldhar Vyas <email@example.com> writes:
|> > This is exactly what the impersonalists say. But Swami Prabhupad's point
|> > is that God DOES have transcendental qualities.
|> Of course the Saguna Brahman has qualities. Even the Nirguna Brahman has
|> the attributes of Sat, Chit, and Ananda. But the Vaishnavas would have
|> us believe that God has attributes such as the Kaustubha Mani, Sudarshan
|> chakra etc. These are merely attributes of the, lower, saguna brahman.
There is no greater truth than Bhagavan, the personal God, Lord
Krishna. He is complete with Sat-chit-ananda. He is always decked
with peacock feather and carrying a flute, and wears a yellow
dhoti. His other forms carry implements like Sudarshan, Gada,
Padma, and Shanka. Refer to Sri Brahma-samhita for vivid
descriptions of Lord Krishna.
Paramatma only has sat and chit, and Brahman only has sat. One of the
great impersonalists converted by Chaitanya in Benares said that brahmananda
(the pleasure of realizing Brahman) was like the dirty water in the hoofprint
of a cow compared to the the nectarean ocean of bhakti.
|> > This is completely incorrect. In Bhagavad-Gita (verse 3.13, if I'm not
|> > mistaken) Lord Krishna says to Arjuna: "The devotees of the Lord are saved by
|> > eating food that has first been offered. Those who prepare food for sense
|> > enjoyment eat only sin."
|> And what makes you think meat is only eaten for sense-enjoyment? Or that
|> vegetarian food is never eaten for enjoyment? There is a famous
Hello? Read the post. It only says that prasadam (food first offered
for the Lord's enjoyment) is without sin. Vegetarians who do not
cook bhoga for the lord are also taking in sin, but less sin than
|> stereotype among Gujaratis of the man who only goes to Vaishnava mandirs
|> so he can eat a good meal.
There is nothing wrong with enjoying prasadam. Eating prasadam
is one of the important steps in gaining bhakti.
|> But the Bengalis who eat meat worship Devi who doesn't have such
|> scruples. So there is nothing wrong with it unless you are saying there
|> is something wrong with worshipping Devi in which case how do you explain
|> Gita 17:4 Note it says Devan not Krshnan.
Those in the material mode of goodness do worship various deities
(devan). But those who worship Krishna are beyond even the mode of
goodness. Worship of Krishna is superior (BG 9.23-25, 8.16, etc etc).
In fact the whole 17th chapter is introduced by a question about
interpretations that are contrary to scripture. The chapter then
discusses demigod worship, demon worship, fasting outside of
scriptural approval, sacrifice for material gain, and so forth.
|> -- Jaldhar