[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: a Post to alt.hindu Why this Ramakrishna- Vivekananda bashing?
X-URL: http://rbhatnagar.ececs.uc.edu:8080//alt_hindu/1995_Feb_1/msg00070.html
> From: tomh7493@aol.com (TomH7493)
> In response to my statement that RAMAKRISHNA proclaimed the validity of
> all paths that lead to GOD, no matter the religion, VIJAY said:
Your statements are like an attempt to get to Calcutta by buying a train
ticket to Bombay ... it won't work. I realize that you RK types don't
particularly care for the Vedas or the Bhagavad Gita, but since this is
alt.hindu (not alt.fan.rk), the Bhagavad Gita should be the final arbiter. I
implore you to read Bhagavad Gita 9:25 -- those who worship the devas go
to the planets of the devas; those who worship the forefathers go to
the planets of the forefathers; those who worship the demons go to the
demoniac planets, but those who worship Krishna go back to Krishna. There is
no idea of "all paths of worship lead to the same place". That is a modern
idea only.
The ancient idea is expressed in BG 9:24 -- although you may sacrifice to many
gods, actually Krishna is the only enjoyer of all sacrifice. People only yield
to other gods out of lack of proper knowledge (avidhi-purvakam, BG 9.23) and
for materialistic desires (BG 7.20). Actually it is Krishna himself who is
bestowing those benefits (BG 7.22).
> >Note that the following paths: Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism,
> >any standard definition of Vaisnavism, etc. all rule out the possibility
> >of RK being God, so if one indeed _accurately_ followed these paths,
> >one couldn't at the same time accept Ramakrishna's teachings.
> Because He acceptes these other paths, but they don't accept HIM only show
> the ignorance and narrowmindedness of these other paths. HE would accept
> your path as being valid.....
First of all, you are wrong. RK _detested_ the Vaisnavas for considering
themselves as sinners, for cultivating the humble servant mood. He thought that
devotees of Krishna were fools for chanting "Hare Krishna" on their japa beads
and still not losing their humble attitudes. RK didn't understand Vaisnavism,
that actually the more one chants "Hare Krishna" the more humble one will
become. A devotee is like a tree, the more fruit he holds, the more he droops
to the ground; a puffed-up pseudo-God is like a monkey, the higher he climbs
the more you see his backside.
I forget which one, but it was either RK or his beloved disciple V who said
"Why grow a tulasi [a Holy plant] when you can grow a bhaigan [eggplant]
instead?" But Vaisnavas always worship Krishna or Vishnu or Rama with leaves from the
Tulasi Devi. Vaisnavas also worship Tulasi Devi Herself. Therefore, these
guys, by opposition to Tulasi, proved themselves directly opposed to the
Vaisnava path.
I personally don't give a damn as to whether RK accepts our path or not; the
Vaisnava path is accepted by all the great sages like Narada, Asita, Devala,
and Vyasa, and by the mahajans like Lord Brahma and Lord Siva. The opinions
of 19th C. pseudo-gods have little impact here.
> Also, why do you feel it so necessary to so vilely attack RAMAKRISHNA,
You still have not answered the questions I asked first a few weeks ago --
why did RK want to be a Vaisnava-aparadhi? Why did he attack the Vaisnavas'
humble spirit? Why did he offend Tulasi Devi? Why did he claim to be
God? Why did he try to take support from the mission of Sri Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu? Why did he tell his disciples Vaisnava-katha and repackage them
as his own "Parables"?
> when we don't feel compelled to attack Prabhupta.
Because there is nothing about Prabhupada for you to attack.
> TomH7493@aol.com
Nitai-Gaura Hari bol!!
Yours,
Vijay
