[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Milk for Lord Ganesha
aq974@lafn.org (Bon Giovanni) wrote:
>I look to those who say they admire purity in the heart, and look away
>from those who say their purity is so high that others pale in
>comparison. This forum offers a view of both outlooks you know, and so
>gives all a chance to express insight as well as insult.
>
Speaking for myself, I prefer to express insight as opposed to insult.
For example, I find no joy in accusing someone of being a bigot, simply
to gain acceptance among the Hindu community.
>I look closely at those who present their insults as if they were
>just an opinon, and sometimes request them to show perzactly what they mean.
>
I look with hope for readers on this net who can tell the difference between something that Bon labels as an insult, and something t=
hat actually IS an insult.
>For example, suppose someone in some forum were to say something like
>
>>Most of the Iskcon devotees were not too surprised that Ganesha would
>>accept milk through his deity form. After all, unlike the modern day
>>mayavadis, we never accepted the bogus theory that the deity in the
>>temple is simply an inanimate mud statue.
>
>If someone were to say something like that, I would probably notice two
>things standing out in bas relief there: first the author says MOST
>Iskcon devotees were not surprised. Secondly he then says WE never
>accepted this and that.
Well, shucks, I must admit that Bon really got me here. I humbly submit that I am no match for his superior mental acumen. I did say=
'MOST,' and that certainly implies that I really don't know for sure what the other devotees thought. Well, the truth is, MOST Iskc=
on devotees were not surprised, because they accept that the deity in the temple is not simply an idol, but rather is nondifferent f=
rom the demigod being worshiped. But, SOME devotees were surprised. Why? Because they were surprised that Lord Ganeshji would bless =
us by allowing us to feed him. I myself was surprised and pleased that Lord Ganesha allowed this poor and fallen rascal to perform t=
his nice service for him. Others were also surprised that they would be given such an opportunity; they were not suprised that Lord =
Ganesha could do such a thing in his deity form.
>
>That implies he not only knows a lotta ISKCONits, but also is a member of
>ISKCON, right?
I don't know how you came to that conclusion. All I said that you can definitively establish is that I do know a lot of Iskcon devot=
ees and associate with them.
Now to such a person, my question would be:
> what `bogus theory' is he talking about?
>
I thought that was clear from my posting. Please reread.
>He refers to some group called `the mayavadis' as if they are real
>people he knows, and goes on to state they have `been brainwashing
>everyone into believing that the deity is simply an idol"
>
>I never came across any person nor any such group. Have you? Then exactly
>who is he talking about? Who are these `mayavadis' doing such nasty
>things? Is the group real, with real people he knows, or is this one of
>those fictional things where people make up their demons, and then insult
>them?
>
Well, I suppose if it were a fictional group, then there would be no reason for you to be offended. I thought we had discussed this =
issue countless times before, but because some require greater time to assimilate new information, I will explain again here.
Mayavadis are people who believe in mayavada. Mayavada is the philosopy that God comes under illusion and consequently becomes the v=
ariegated material world, with all its individual jivas who are under the "illusion" that they are the devotees of God. This class o=
f philosophers are called mayavadis because they inadvertantly state that the Supreme can come under illusion. In fact, the term has=
been used extensively to describe both the followers of Sripada Sankaracharya, as well as many of the popular Hindu movements of to=
day which water down his philosophy in order to make it more appealing to the materialistic people.
In fact, S. Radhakrishnan, who is himself a mayavadi, uses the term mayavada to describe the philosophy of advaita. He never express=
ed any feeling of insult at the use of the term. Therefore, there is no reason why the mayavadis should be insulted. They must simpl=
y understand the difference between mayavada and the personalistic, theistic schools of Vedanta. Such an understanding can teach us =
many things.
>If anyone were to say such things, they might then go on to imply
>ISKCON is the only real healthy sect around today.
As a matter of fact, I have stated on a number of different occasions that any bona fide spiritualists who come out of the Sri, Brah=
ma, Rudra, or Kumara sampradayas are the "real healthy sects" today, as stated in the Padma Purana, which Srila Vyasadeva has so nic=
ely compiled for our benefit. I beg your forgiveness if I was unable to make this clear for you. A spiritualist who claims that he c=
an lead his followers to liberation need only trace his lineage of disciplic succession to one of these four sampradayas.
My experience is that humble spiritual masters, such as Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Nimbarkacarya, Visnuswami, Jayadeva Swami, Vedan=
ta Desika, Lord Brahma, Lord Shiva, and A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami have no trouble giving their spiritual lineage to the sincere inqui=
rer. But those who try to hide the fact that they do not hail from any of the four established Vedanta sampradayas often do have suc=
h trouble, and they even take offense at such an inquiry, hoping to maintain their following despite their lack of qualification.
>>All this makes me quite uneasy. As far as the Vaisnavas are concerned,
>>we never denied Ganesha's existence, and so our faith has not really
>>been altered. But there are many people whose faith has come simply as
>>a result of this, and I have to wonder if such faith is healthy,
>>tempered by scriptural guidelines, or if it will be blind, as in the
>>case of those who follow India's many self-professed "Gods" who
>>manifest magic tricks to lure the naive.
>
>What people are blindly worshiping Ganesha? Who are they exactly, and who
>are those blind men following blindly some selfprofessed Gods who manifest
>magic tricks?
>
>If that author actually means a particular group or a particular God, then
>let him say so. But wait. If anyone were silly enough to actually call
>others blind for how they worship, then I would wonder why such a
>healthy sect as ISKCON would foster such a sick attitude of insulting
>people?
>
I wonder how the great Sathya Sai Baba can condone one of his devotees accusing others of making insult, where none was made. That t=
here are some who blindly follow a particular religion, without questioning, is a given. That such people can also be found in Hindu=
ism is also given. For example, some people insist that their particular guru is God, but absolutely refuse to give any empirical or=
scriptural evidence supporting such a thing. And yet, if one does not accept their "God," one is frequently labeled as a "Hitler" o=
r a "Nazi" by followers of such Gods.
Furthermore, I wonder what logical process it is that Bon has used that has extrapolated that I believe all worshipers of Ganesha to=
be blind. As a matter of fact, I myself worship Lord Ganeshaji. My family celebrates Ganesha caturdasi every year, and I was deeply=
sorry that I was not able to attend this year and make a nice offering for him.
All I said was that there are some worshipers of Ganesha who do so blindly. Not that all Ganesha devotees are blind. I humbly submit=
that a person of true humility, with no menacing feelings in his heart, would have seen the difference. But one who is always looki=
ng for fault in others, finds insult where none is present. Such people accuse others of the very vices which they themselves posess=
in full measure.
>If anyone were to ever actually be so coarse, I would most likely be
>astounded the moderators let such vile comments pass, and would very
>much ask folks to note that ISKCONites vanity, and denounce it.
>
As a matter of fact, I am wondering why the moderator allowed your postings to pass, especially when you make statments like the fol=
lowing:
>If that ever happened, or course. But then of course no ISKCONite would
>ever exhibit such coarse rudeness in open forum. No Hare Krishna would
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>ever act like a complete ass like that. Not even doctors are so
^^^^^^^^^^^^
arrogant.
^^^^^^^^^
It is obvious from the above that this is a personal attack. Any intelligent reader can see who is being labeled with the above adje=
ctives. So I must inquire from Ajay Shah, why is it that he allows such obvious attacks to be posted, when he has rejected other art=
icles for reasons that are unclear to both Ajay himself and the poster of the article. Perhaps Ajay Prabhu should utilize the same s=
tandard of moderation for all groups represented here, rather than remaining lax towards those he favors and strictly regulating tho=
se he disagrees with. Such activities are not befitting one who calls himself a moderator.
As for Sri Bon Giovanni, I have no interest in getting into another long and drawn out "debate" with him, on this group or any other=
, as such "debates" generally find me getting labeled with all sorts of tasteless adjectives, both directly and indirectly. Obviousl=
y, his method of argument is far superior to any that I have ever known, and I humbly admit that I cannot even begin to defeat a per=
son who uses such a style of argument. In fact, I have trouble understanding how a person can be so obviously right simply because h=
e has the courage to accuse another person so viciously when not seeing that person face-to-face. But then, this lack of understandi=
ng is probably a symptom of my own deficient intelligence, as is my stubborn refusal to use such tactics to further my own beliefs.
yours,
Krishna
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderator: Ajay Shah Submissions: srh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
Administrivia: srh-request@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu
Archives: http://rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu:8080/soc_hindu_home.html
References:
