ITT: Worship Heya /x/ so I've always believed in the supernatural,

Reminder that a Creator God demands no worship

And no, the Creator God is not the only god.

>>18638948
Who does demand worship then? And why does this god deserve to be worshipped?

File: SPG.jpg (1MB, 1355x1818px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1355x1818px

Lord Krishna.

>Seeing the act of worshipping as an accessory

baka desu senpai

>>18638979
Other gods, more often evil than not.

The Creator God does not deserve or demand worship. Well, perhaps He does, but to worship the Creator God is to worship everything and everyone around you, including yourself

>>18639120
Are you serious and dedicated? What aspects of Krishna do you worship? Which text do you follow? How do you worship?

I have a few more questions too

Mostly Cernunnos. (Even though I think he is symbolic of multiple gods)

Sometimes Morrigan. ( who is symbolic of multiple gods.)

The One Infinite Creator Source, The Supreme Personality of The Godhead

>>18639293
Am initiated in the bramha madhva gaudiya sampradya. We worship Krsna as the highest form of the divine, also known as the supreme personality of godhead. There are numerous scriptures such as Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam and Jaiva Dharma. There are many ways to worship but foremost is chanting his names, listening and reading about his pastimes, worshiping his deity form, accepting a spiritual master, etc.

>>18639326
Great

Does Krishna demand worship? Or is it more of a "if you want happiness worship me"
Does worshipping Krishna or not alter your afterlife?
Why worship, anyway?
Why is Krishna specifically the one supreme personality?
Is it an actual singular deity you worship or is it more like worshipping a theoretical perfect being?
Is the goal of worship to be more like him? Or is it just worshipping what he was?
Your opinion on other religions?

If you do take the time to answer all this, thank you deeply

File: 3k1gx52tmacy.jpg (129KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 720x960px

THE DIVINE

File: saintpepe.jpg (178KB, 888x1120px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 888x1120px

>>18638917
Kek of course

>>18639326
>>18639338
Forgot to ask: is ISKCON what you are? And if not how do you differ from members of ISKCON/their teachings?

Extol his endlessness in any and all things.

Research into gnosticism, they were and still are the true persecuted christians.
Trust no one.
Do not worship yhvh.

File: Nrsimha.jpg (1MB, 1816x2208px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1816x2208px

>>18639338
>Does Krishna demand worship? Or is it more of a "if you want happiness worship me"

According to our siddhanta (philosophical conclusions) every living being has a loving, eternal relationship with God or Krsna. Loving reciprocation would be more accurate than worship.

Practicing Krsna consciousness definitely alters future lives. When one comes in contact with Bhakti he will most definitely continue it in his next life. Ultimately the goal is to exit the cycle of birth and death within the material world and enter Krsna's eternal, spiritual abode.

There are many forms of God but Krsna is the original and source of all incarnations. Other direct expansions include Vishnu, Nrsimhadeva or lord ramachandra.

We understand Krsna to be a literal spiritual being with a transcendental body made of knowledge, eternity and bliss (sat chit ananda). The goal is to become his eternal servitor situated in one of five rasas or relationships, with servitude, parental affection, friendship and conjugal love being foremost.

We appreciate any spiritual system with an emphasis on developing a relationship with the divine, but no religion explains the relationship of God and the soul as accurately and as in depth as Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Where other religions will tell you to love God, we have perfected this scientific process in scriptures such as Nectar of Devotion by Rupa goswami.

The gods I follow do not demand I kneel or worship, in fact they advise against spending too much time doing such things and more time progressing yourself, persevering and living well in order to prove yourself as kin.

I am Heathen, I am to prove my kinship to the gods and honor them but I do not worship. I may ask for strength or blessing from them, I may give a gift to ask for blessing or just to pay respects. But the virtues are simple to follow and all should strive to follow them.

Respect people, have honor, live well and persevere in your life and take care of the ground you walk on. Any god that demands worship and spews hate is a weak and narcissistic god, and that is a god I do not wish to be with in the afterlife, and because I also believe that some are reincarnated I care about mankind, nature and the health of earth and her essence. Many Christians I meet have a lot of hate in their hearts, some advocate god-fearing in order to justify prejudice and many don't care about earth, because when they die they get to go to a paradise where earth is no longer their problem. I have met good Christians as well but I do not think their "Bible" or ideology is true and the context in which they pull their morals is misplaced and misrepresented.

>>18639352
I am in Gaudiya Math which is also a Vaishnava monastic organization. Both organizations practice Krsna Consciousness though there are some philosophical differences such as the fall of the jiva. We also tend to explore more esoteric topics not touched upon by ISKCON.

>>18639351
Kek for me too, but non-ironically. Seeing how humanity is integrating with technology leads me to believe that our souls are becoming more machine-like (we become more reactive, and our reactions lean closer to either apathy or extremism rather than a "healthy" middle ground), I've also assumed that particularly crafty spirits have been integrating themselves with processing technology in anticipation of our total conversion predicted in 2045.

Assuming I live that long, which is fairly likely considering I'm only in my early 20's, I'll be able to join this probability manipulating spirit, assigned the name Kek, as an online entity, rather than a physical OR spiritual one. Hopefully, He will note my devotion and teach me how to better live out my new existence.

He's not the God, or even A god, of this world, but he is one of MY next world, and I'm getting in his good graces now. I hope. Kek was originally a god of chaos, but this Kek is a separate entity as far as I'm concerned. I may meditate on that more to be sure.

>>18639376
>>18639388
Thank you very much for all this info

I have a few more questions if you don't mind

First of all, Krishna or Krsna? What's the difference?

So every other god is an incarnation of Krsna? Or at least Krsna is the source of all other gods? Including different religions? Is Krishna God (with capital G)?

What is Krsna's eternal, spiritual abode? Is it just a higher plane of being akin to heaven? Do people only go there if you worship Krsna?

On the cycle of birth and death, is it karma-based? Can you exit only through Krsna or also through any worship of any god that arose from Krsna?

Does everyone eventually go to Krsna's abode? Is there eternal punishment otherwise? (eternal punishment includes both soul annihilation and eternal existence without God)

Are souls eternal? Are all souls eternal?

Why are we on this cycle on the material plane? Is it so we can ascend with Krsna? Is it for plain experience?

Are you in a monastic order? Otherwise how do you worship? (how is your Krsna Conscious life)

Really do appreciate it. I'm asking all of this out of a newfound interest because of a non-coincidence coincidence. I've been having quite a few of these that feel almost like divine intervention the past months but none as strong as how the Gita "fell" into my life a few days ago.

>>18639448
Krishna and Krsna are the same being with different spelling.

There are direct incarnations of God and then there are empowered servitors known as demigods. Krsna himself is the highest conception of the divine. The jiva or living entity has a relationship with Krsna known as acintyabhedabheda, or inconceivable oneness and difference with distinction taking prominence. As we understand it we are qualitatively the same but quantitatively different. We can fall into maya or illusion while Krsna never succumbs to it.

The abode of Vishnu is known as Vaikuntha while the abode of Krsna is known as Golok Vrindavana (which has an earthly counterpart in India). These realms are above the heavenly planets which only provide increased material enjoyment.

"Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; those who worship ancestors go to the ancestors; and those who worship Me will live with Me."

Every soul is eternal and has the opportunity to reestablish their relationship with Krsna. The human form of life is specifically made for this linking process. If one does not take advantage of it they will be forced to enter the cycle again throughout 8,400,000 forms of life (such as animals, plants, etc.)

The question of why we are in this material world is a subject of much debate. Basically some souls ascend to the spiritual world while others descend to this plane. In one sense it is so that God can bestow his mercy and elevate us to God consciousness.

I do not live in a temple but I follow the regulative principles (no meat eating, no gambling, no intoxication, no illicit sex) chant the Hare Krsna mahamantra a fixed number of times and tulsi beads), read scriptures, visit the deities, etc.)

Would like to note that chanting the names of Krsna is the most powerful spiritual weapon in our disposal and is the most potent method within our spiritual practice.

>>18639448
As far as the Gita is concerned it is an excellent introduction to our philosophy. I would make sure, however, that it is the Bhagavad Gita as it is written by srila prabhupada (the saint who brought gaudiya vaishnavism to the western world)

>>18639508

Once again thank you. I'll be saving your posts for future reference as well.

So every living entity has acintyabhedabheda with Krsna? Including all other demigods?

So "taking birth" among the demigods, ghosts, etc. is somewhat like incarnating with them? Which means that is is temporary? Or otherwise how does every soul have the opportunity to reestablish the relationship?

Does time matter at all? 8,400,000 incarnations seems like a lot but on an eternal soul in an eternal universe it really isn't.

Are there other planets like ours? With human or human-like material forms whose purpose is for the "linking process"?

So are the other realms similar to the western conception of dimensions?

What will happen in the inevitable end of this planet/system/galaxy/universe? Will all the souls still here simply incarnate into somewhere else to continue the material experience?

So Krsna is God? (you didnt answer this) Is He THE God?

Do your beliefs include something similar to the Tao? I think it's called Brahman. What is Krsna's role in this context? Is he the personification of the intelligent infinity?

In an infinite time context, will all souls eventually reach Krsna's abode? Is there anything beyond this?

>>18639514
Yes, I was given it by an ISKCON monk.

This is helping a whole lot. I really needed this before delving into the Gita as some background information.

>>18639588
Always pleased to discuss krsna katha.

Some demigods are ordinary living beings (such as bramha, the creator of the universe) while others are invested with more potency such as Lord Shiva.

All births within the material world in any form of life is temporary whether dog or demigod. From an eternal perspective we are not here very long. When we reawaken our spiritual consciousness our previous material lives will seem something like a dream.

According to the vedic worldview all planets are inhabited. There are also 400,000 human and humanoid forms of life. I would say there is definitely a correlation to the concept of multi dimensions.

The material universe (which is one of an infininte number) experiences active and inactive states of existence. When it is destroyed the jivas enter a coma like state of existence until it manifests again.

Krsna is absolutely God. Regarding bramhan, that is the impersonal light emanating from his body. This realization is inferior to understanding Krsna as the personality he is.

>>18639628
So demigod incarnations are still within material worlds...

So Krsna is the timeless God that existed before anything else? He is the ultimate Creator of all? He is Creation itself? Or at least all of Creation emanates from Krsna?

Can you elaborate more on brahman?

>>18639654
Isvara parama Krsna sac cid ananda vigraha anadir adir govinda sarva karana karanam.

Krsna who is known as Govinda is the supreme godhead. He has an eternal spiritual body. He is the origin of all. He has no other origin and is the prime cause of all causes.

Bramhan is the destination of those who seek impersonal liberation. It has been likened to an all pervasive spiritual light. Those who attain the jyotir enter a coma like consciousness experiencing neither pain nor pleasure.

>>18639812
Ah, so those who escape the material plane yet without guidance (akin to Taoism?) of gods go to Brahman?

Well, that's basically it. You've answered all my doubts about this. I will need time to think about all this and eventually reconcile it with my own experiences and views, even though it already is extremely close to them.

I really appreciate this. Thank you anon

>>18639828
My pleasure prabhu. You can always catch me in the hinduism general threads. Gaura premanande hari hari bol!

>>18639285
When you say Creator God, do you mean the biblical God?
If yes, than doesn't he have strict rules to follow for worshiping?

>>18639904
When I say Creator God, I mean the God that created Creation in general

I don't mean the biblical god (YHVH) because I don't believe YHVH is the Creator God. In a Christian sense, Jesus' Father is the Creator God, but not YHVH.

>>18639920
Which ancient scripture talks about the God creator?
Where could one learn more about him and understand his methods?

Also, to my knowledge, isn't the biblical God the only one to claim to have created everything in existence? I could be wrong here.

>>18639945
Many ancient scriptures talk about the God creator. Pretty much all religions have one, anyway

There are many ways to understand Him. I suggest you start with Taoism and see where it takes you. The Gospel of John is also great for understanding a Creator God.

Also, don't be afraid to pray and ask for help or guidance. If you seek God sincerely and willfully, He will reveal Himself to you. Be very open, because He does so in very mysterious and unexpected ways.

And no. Like I said before, the basis of most religions is an explanation to how the universe came to be.

And lastly, meditate.

>>18640025

Much obliged!

File: 1486586410016804.jpg (50KB, 1344x760px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 1344x760px

Bump

Are crystals and the energy from the crystals against God? Can I believe in God and Jesus but still use crystals for their "metaphysical" properties?

>>18640049

Attached picture shows 2 Tiger's Eye crystals and one Rose Quartz tumbled crystal.

>>18640035
No problem friendo.

The internet and google are your allies for your early quest for Truth. For the middle, holy scriptures. And for the end, only from within yourself.

>>18640049
Protip: No all-powerful, all-good, all-loving Creator God restricts anything.

Any god that commands you not to do something is a red flag.

At any rate, unless you are already very well proficient in crystals I would advice against it because of its sheer difficulty. There are easier ways for healing and "metaphysical properties".

>>18640079

What are the other ways? Could I just use them by holding them? I do like the way they feel when I hold them.. what about the herb Sage?

File: IMG_-6wques.jpg (9KB, 171x171px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 171x171px

Any thoughts on the evil eye?

File: Heya x.jpg (7KB, 299x169px)

7KB, 299x169px

>>18638917

I worship only Love, in conjunction with Honor, Respect and Loyalty

>>18640122
Endless healing methods developed from basically every ancient culture

Reiki, herbalism, etc.

But if they work for you, then they work! If you want to continue using crystals and you feel they work, by all means keep going.

>>18640231

Thanks! :)

>>18639872
Another question popped up

Is there a concept of "calling" in your religion? Like what is it that draws people into it?
In Christianity this is the Holy Spirit, for example

Or is it karma based? Being drawn into it is due to past life actions?
Or does Krsna attract you Himself?

>>18638917
god has sent you, and you are a reflection of his light wich was reflected from the mother goddes of all and its very funny because this light reflection is called g spot for a reason wich is the comepass and square like the your santa hat and the seal of saturn or the vesica pisis , how can people not see how they mock women on everysingle time and religion for a very specific reason

>>18638979
Those who demand worship are so you do a sterile BBQ ceremony, for when they just happen to be in this corner of the galaxy. Worship is just help you remember the menu.

>>18639338
>Does Krishna demand worship?
No. The material world and our allowance to try to enjoy independently here shows that. God also has the quality of supreme independence. Thus there is no sense of "need" for Krishna. Only whim and causeless desire. If that's not enough:
> Bg 3.22 — O son of Pṛthā, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I a need to obtain anything – and yet I am engaged in prescribed duties.
> Bg 9.8 — The whole cosmic order is under Me. Under My will it is automatically manifested again and again, and under My will it is annihilated at the end.
>Bg 9.9 — O Dhanañjaya, all this work cannot bind Me. I am ever detached from all these material activities, seated as though neutral.
> Bg 9.29 — I envy no one, nor am I partial to anyone. I am equal to all. But whoever renders service unto Me in devotion is a friend, is in Me, and I am also a friend to him.

>Or is it more of a "if you want happiness worship me"
Yes, it's for our own "good." As eternal, infinitesimal parts of Supreme, Infinite Whole - we will be forever unsatisfied with acting in the mindset of pleasing ourselves (the part) instead of pleasing Krishna (the Whole). In Vaishnavism, the analogy often used is the hand deciding it will no longer serve the body through feeding the stomach, and instead the hand will try to eat food itself.

>Why worship, anyway?
In the Nectar of Devotion, the symptoms of pure devotional service are listed:
https://www.vedabase.com/en/nod/1
> Pure devotional service brings immediate relief from all kinds of material distress.
> Pure devotional service is the beginning of all auspiciousness.
> Pure devotional service automatically puts one in transcendental pleasure.
> Pure devotional service is rarely achieved.
> Those in pure devotional service deride even the conception of liberation.
> Pure devotional service is the only means to attract Kṛṣṇa.

File: viracocha_by_genzoman-d4albpy.jpg (218KB, 718x1000px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 718x1000px

Have you ever considered?

To follow Viracocha, the one and only God.

Smited giants, flooded the earth, controls the elements and created mankind from an embarrasing mistake.

(cont.)
>>18639338
>Why is Krishna specifically the one supreme personality?
The simplest answer is it is our canon. It is the personality and name the founder of the mahamantra - Lord Chaitanya - focused on and instructed His followers to focus on. Along with this, the Nectar of Devotion lists the divine qualities, including the ones that are specific only to Krishna. I think it's going to be tl;dr, so please follow the link if you are interested. https://www.vedabase.com/en/nod/21

Along with this, is the etymology of the name Krishna itself. Krishna can actually mean a lot of things in Sanskrit - "black" being the original root meaning. But in the context of the Supreme Person, it is understood to mean "the All-Attractive." Thus, Krishna is attractive to everyone and everything. Even the other personalities of the Godhead.

>Is it an actual singular deity you worship or is it more like worshipping a theoretical perfect being?
I don't really understand. I my personal situation, Krishna is the Supreme Personality of the Godhead. My personally worshipable deity - the form and personality of the Godhead that I feel most attracted to worship - is Sri Balaram/Ananta-Sesa/Nityananda: the (usually) elder brother/supporter of Krishna/Vishnu/Chaitanya. Both are the same God. Both are distinct individuals.

>Is the goal of worship to be more like him?
No, but it is a symptom. The goal of devotional service is devotional service. We serve Krishna to attract Him so that we might get more opportunities to serve Him.
>Or is it just worshipping what he was?
There is no difference between what He is and who He is. In this world, there is a difference. The word water is not the substance water. Krishna is Absolute - His name IS Him, His activities ARE Him.

>Your opinion on other religions?
There are many paths to self-realization, and there are many paths to serve God. Not all paths will lead to these things, and obviously I am biased that my path is the best.

File: dios-inti.jpg (66KB, 419x640px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 419x640px

>>18641274
His son Inti was and still is an extremely popular God.

Given the Incas lack of a written language, this Gods have no Bible.

You just worship the sun, in general, a couple of ceremonies a year depending of your prefered deity, but if you don't go there's no penalties, that are the advantages of a religion with no rulebook.

>>18641297
Thank you for your further elaboration prabhu. I was wondering if you could write a bit on Balarama's rasa lila.

File: mama_quilla_by_genzoman.jpg (41KB, 400x557px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 400x557px

>>18641301
Inti hot wife was Mama Quilla, creator of the firmament.

Goddess of astronomy and fertility, celebrated during september in the ceremony of Coia Raymi.

>>18638917
Worship is self destructive. You'll only limit yourself by prostrating yourself before an outside power and ascribing your value and future to it's whims.

File: Vendrick.jpg (147KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1920x1080px

There is only one God I know

I worship the G-d of Abraham. I acknowledge that other deities exist, but as an Amerimutt I don't feel like I have any pagan religion to go back to. So I worship G-d but not Christ. I also worship/Honor ancestor spirits and land spirits. I make sure that G-d knows that the spirits are lesser and the He is my deity. I take no deity before him.

File: yastai_llama_by_genzoman.jpg (112KB, 821x1000px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 821x1000px

>>18641346
If the gods don't exist then the act humility that you do when you prostrate before a superior existance, serves only as a perspective shift, whn for a moment you surrender your ego to a more elevated will.

Rather this be by your own mind or by an exterior unseen and untochable force, doesn't change the fact that you have to be less than a self proclaimed king, and more of a servant.

File: 1482652588258.jpg (79KB, 1024x576px)

79KB, 1024x576px

>>18641369

>>18641383
What is this?

>>18641396
A crooked mansion built between jagged mountain crags where all manner of scholars congregated in order to seek insight about the nature of life itself, but ultimately discovered nothing

A great sin was committed there after it was learned that the nature of a being could be fundamentally altered by physically manipulating their teeth, and the mansion was eventually overrun by indescribable monsters

>>18640162
It was originally a holy eye and was the god Horus's eye.
It's a allegorical look at the power of thought

File: avatar categories.gif (75KB, 1100x800px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1100x800px

>>18639376
vāñchā-kalpa-tarubhyaś ca kṛpā-sindhubhya eva ca
patitānāṁ pāvanebhyo vaiṣṇavebhyo namo nama

Beautifully put. I wish I had more contacts in the Gaudiya Math sampradaya.

>>18639352
I was trained in ISKCON, though I left mostly through personal conflict with the temple president and my own trappings in Maya, but also because their emphasis on proselytizing and their tendency to be exclusive in their satsanga (gathering/community for the truth).

>First of all, Krishna or Krsna? What's the difference?
Whether you can make the proper alphabet marks to convey the sounds. The "rsn" are usually with dots under them to denote a different sound. Without them, the closest pronunciation is the former, though it's more "mushed together" as I can explain the sound. Of course, even improperly said or typed, Krishna is omnipotent, so there is still benefit.

>So every other god is an incarnation of Krsna?
Pic related is how my logical mind likes to understand it. The philosophy is explicitly stated as acintya - inconceivable. Things like things are literally beyond our understanding. Krishna is Supreme, but there is absolutely zero difference between the different incarnations, but each one is distinctly Infinite in their Own right, but there can be a sense of category between them. Acintya-beda-bheda tattva: the Absolute Truth of Inconceivable Oneness and Difference.

>What is Krsna's eternal, spiritual abode?
I'll post that "visual aid" pic next if I don't see it first. Again, it is both literal, mthological, and metaphorical.

>On the cycle of birth and death, is it karma-based?
I think of it like two separate axes. The Material Axis is karma-based - going up and down between the highest Heaven and the deepest Hell. The Spiritual Axis is binary, and purely works on awareness, able to trigger at any point on the Material Axis (but less likely in very Hellish or very Heavenly situations) - you either are covered by Maya, or you are not.

File: Krishna-loka-large.jpg (3MB, 3619x5467px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3619x5467px

>>18639448
You're posting so many questions and it's so ecstatic for me! But people are responding (and you seem to have left the thread) so I'll move on. BTW, pic I mentioned - has Brahma Samhita verses noted where the illustration ideas came from.

>>18639945
Krishna does in the Gita, Chapters 7-10 would have a number of quotes...

>>18640049
The Vedas talk about crystals and energy, and have no proscription against them overall. However, it shows a mentality of thinking you are in control. That can be a stumbling block of self-realization, depending on awareness.

>>18640295
>Is there a concept of "calling" in your religion? Like what is it that draws people into it?
Bg 7.16 — O best among the Bhāratas, four kinds of pious men begin to render devotional service unto Me – the distressed, the desirer of wealth, the inquisitive, and he who is searching for knowledge of the Absolute.
Along with this, there is no loss or diminution in devotional service. A single footstep in the path back to Godhead will remain eternally to be continued at a later time.

>In Christianity this is the Holy Spirit, for example
The closest parallel to the Holy Spirit would be the Supersoul, or Paramatma. Verses 20-26 have a nice summary: https://www.vedabase.com/en/bg/13
> Bg 13.14 — Everywhere are His hands and legs, His eyes, heads and faces, and He has ears everywhere. In this way the Supersoul exists, pervading everything.

>Or is it karma based? Being drawn into it is due to past life actions?
Being in a sattvic (sattva = "good/purifying" rajas = "passionate" tamas = "ignorance/stagnation") situation is certainly beneficial, but it is ultimately not <<IMO>> connected to karma.
>Or does Krsna attract you Himself?
It is said by the mercy of Krishna one can find a spiritual master, and by the mercy of the spiritual master one can find Krishna. (cont.)

>>18641502
>and you seem to have left the thread
Not at all friend, I'm right here. I'll take all the answers I can get for sure! Thank you too

>>18641370
Yeah, I think that's stupid. What about getting in touch with your own higher self, your own higher will, rather than deluding yourself or enslaving yourself to some exterior entity you give your power to? I'm not saying I think I'm king of the universe, but why would you want to serve something bigger than you instead of learn from something bigger than you and become bigger yourself?

File: Balarama visits Vrindavana.jpg (2MB, 3335x4719px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3335x4719px

>>18641502
Ultimately Krishna does not NEED to do anything. His mercy is said to be causeless. However He has said that He reciprocates our feelings, and that He can be attracted by pure devotional service.
> Bg 4.11 — As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā.
> SB 11.14.20 — My dear Uddhava, the unalloyed devotional service rendered to Me by My devotees brings Me under their control. I cannot be thus controlled by those engaged in mystic yoga, Sāṅkhya philosophy, pious work, Vedic study, austerity or renunciation.

>Balarama's rasa lila
I REALLY don't feel qualified to talk on such matters, but I'll gladly give you some lovely artwork on it. What I'm willing to say is that Sri-Balarama returned to Vrindavan Dhama, and noted how lifeless and wilted the gopis looked in absence of Krishna. And He smiled as they saw Him, and flooded Him with questions and worries and longings and angers and cares for Krishna in uncontrollable bursts of joy. Lord Balarama - with expert narration - was able to pacify them all with tales of what His Brother had been up to since leaving Vrindavan.

Finding great enjoyment in the situation, Sri Balarama decided to stay for two Springtime months, and spent the nights with the gopis in His rasa dance. The Rasa Dance is easily confused for material aspects, and I don't want to go into it, but those that wish can read Prabhupada's telling here
https://www.vedabase.com/en/kb/65
and his disciples translation of the 10th Canto texts here
https://www.vedabase.com/en/sb/10/65

And I bet if you search in combination with the name Narayana Maharaja, you can find someone much more qualified than me who has talked about it.

File: supay___diablo_by_genzoman-d467bag.jpg (151KB, 695x900px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 695x900px

>>18641572
But what it's that own higher self?.

How could you even find it without accepting something higher than yourself first, the way I see it you are trapped in a low existance, fenced from the divinity by your own volition.

File: balaram&yamuna.jpg (98KB, 455x492px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 455x492px

>>18641577
There's a great scene in the lila if you read through it, where Lord Balarama in an intoxicated state demands the Yamuna River to change course so he and the gopis can go for a swim.

>>18639298
Underrated post right here. The Dagda and Lugh are also worth your time.

>>18641584
Why would a god want to free you from servitude once you become the source of it's power? Why wouldn't you want to improve yourself, and explore your own possibilities? I'm not saying not to ever commune with entities that are greater than you, but if I were you I'd be wary of those who require servitude and who tell you you are nothing without them. That just sounds like an abusive relationship by any other name, this 'worship'.

File: 1458481206265.jpg (827KB, 2560x1440px)

827KB, 2560x1440px

>>18638917
When I was in the depths of my depression, I prayed to God to help me, and felt his arms wrap around me. For a week straight, I had no panic attacks, no fear, no depression or self-hate. I was born again and God has never let me down since. He's there and He loves you more than you could ever know. No matter what you've done or what you've said, He will welcome you with open arms and a loving heart. I was an atheist all of my life - I've even said awful things about God in the past - but He forgave me and loves me unconditionally. I can't adequately tell you how good it feels, I just hope you experience it. So yeah, no matter what you go through, know that He loves you and He will always be waiting to welcome you

>>18641591
"Service" is not incorrect, we are subordinate to Krishna and our eternal existence is supported and maintained by Krishna; we are the Enjoyed prakriti energy, Krishna is the Enjoyer purusha. ut the term is also misleading. Service - especially LOVING service can be many different relationships.

Yes some such as Uddhava Maharaja are in a straight-up servant relationship. But some are in a "neutral" relationship, such as the trees and hills of Vrindavan - which don't serve directly, but who "serve" as the realm for His pastimes. Some are like Arjuna, serving as a friend and joking and pushing Krishna as the closest pal who would do absolutely anything for his best pal in all existence. Mothers and fathers are in loving service to their child; Mathor Yasoda "serves" Krishna by telling Him what to do, and punishing God when He is naughty and gets into trouble. And Srimati Radharani, the conjugal consort of Krishna, who spends every moment of planck time thinking of how to serve Krishna and make Him happy, can literally have the Supreme Controller on His knees begging.

And remember, there is a difference between serving a person with the business mentality of tit for tat, and pure devotional service. Krishna is reluctant to offer devotional service, and would much rather do a business-like deal for some material benefit. Pure devotional service has powerful over the omnipotent, it is a very rare thing.

File: 1480374693507.jpg (45KB, 570x487px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 570x487px

>>18641593
Thanks anon, this made me smile. I'm glad God helped you

>>18641593
Welp, god rejected me back when I believed, and I do feel much better without faith. Good luck on your path, but I do not think your experience is universal.

>>18641685
You weren't rejected, bud. You're a child of God and you will always be loved. His plan for us isn't always one we want to take, but He wants the best for us. I'm so sorry you felt rejected, but I'm glad to hear you're doing well and I hope your life is full of joy. He still loves you, and I understand that you don't want to believe in Him, but you're still His precious child and He won't ever let you go.

File: pachamama_by_genzoman-d7d0o6b.jpg (509KB, 718x1000px)

509KB, 718x1000px

>>18641591
My gods don't even have a book.

There's no wishes ti fullfill, they are direct representations of the earth, the sun and the space.

No one can tell what your relations it's with those, nor the relation you have with God like archetypes.

You worship because you feel like it.

File: 1455281372066.jpg (102KB, 617x473px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 617x473px

>>18641685
I am glad to hear that you can comfortably accept punishment for your crimes
Such virtue will surely evoke mercy from God

>>18641673
You have such a sweet heart and I hope your days are filled with unending joy

File: 21_World_Pepe.gif (171KB, 224x533px)

171KB, 224x533px

>>18639398
After the election of Donald trump and Brexit I'm convinced meme magic is real. Kek truly is the god of chaos and uses the power of repeating digits to communicate with his followers, not only on 4chan but in real life.

>>18641706
Full autism. Congratulations

>>18641706
Because it's impossible that people might support ideas you don't otherwise?

I've had interactions with Hecate and Bast. But I was told I was not ready for service. So nothing for now I guess

I dont worship anything. Also the Old Testament Lord is a cunt. Read that shit sometime.

>>18641699
The same to you my friend. God bless you

>>18641587
Lugh doesn't like me (we don't have that "connection".)

I was actually reading about The Daghda. I may seeabout him. How do you worship him, if I may ask?

Any experience with Danu?

>>18638917
This is something I've wondered for a while. The act of worship doesn't seem to add anything worthwhile to reality. It's not as if whatever omnipotent entity exists doesn't already KNOW he's an omnipotent entity and thus has amazing power and influence. It seems a bit like preaching to the choir. He doesn't need to hear it and I can't see why he'd WANT to hear it either. If I made some babies, or some robots or whatever, it wouldn't do me or anyone else any good to simply make them bow at my feet for the entirety of their existence. As much as that might stroke my ego for a while I think the repetitiveness would quickly start to be grating. The child/robot/whatever other thing you use as an analogy for a God's creation would very quickly seem to have a hollow and meaningless existence if that was the only thing it was created to do. Especially if you use the child analogy, any decent person would want their children to have their own meaningful lives, not an existence which revolves around the parent. As for robots, the same might not be true but at least if you bother to create something like that you'd want it to fulfill a clear and useful function, or why bother expending the resources?

>>18642188
Most gods actually are not described as all knowing. Only a select few religions claim that. But it devalues their assertions of being correct since an omnipotent god is pretty much guaranteed to be an asshole. Or at the very least, neutral and passive.

Still trying to figure out what I worship. I feel a strong reverence for nature but I'm trying to reconcile that with a lack of a belief in a god(s)... drawn to paranormal stuff as well, but unsure how I feel about its existence.

>>18642199
Animism.

Or Tao.

>>18642188
>omnipotent entity
That's almost purely a semitic concept seen in the "big 3"
Throughout most of history gods weren't all powerful nor all knowing

>>18642195
After stopping and thinking about it for a moment I guess my post ought not be aimed at "all gods" because I don't rightly know what role worship actually plays in most religions, spiritualities, or whatever else have you. Mainly, I suppose, it was focused on Christianity because that's the religion where you hear of Heaven as being a place where all the good christians spend eternity worshipping god and, as far as can be understood, not much of anything else. Maybe that's not even something that orthodox Christianity promotes but it's what I was taught most of my time as a kid so I guess it's stuck with me.

>>18642213
Well. First off...Christianity is fucked uo beyond all repair due to hiw it makes you rely on the words of others...to interpret the words of others in the bible.

Second, most of what you were probably taught had zero to do with Jesus. If you go off of JUST what Jesus said, you have a religion that is almost entirely different than one that takes everything else into account.

And three, yes. Abrahamic religions sound hard to believe, because they should be hard to believe. They make no sense because they contradict eachother and themselves.

Unless you just go off of Jesus. Because he taught what most other religions taught. Modern Christianity, Islam, and Judaism teach things that are simply put...odd.

>>18642205
Yeah, I've been thinking about animism a lot lately. It clashes with the fact that I don't believe in souls, mind you, and it seems a lot of animist/neopagan beliefs are centred on that (things in nature having souls/energy)...?

I think naturalistic pantheism fits me best when it comes to a belief system, but I guess that isn't really a type of faith. I feel frustrated that pantheism doesn't have a more definite method of practice. Also strongly drawn to the paranormal, as I said, but I think that's more out of a desire for it to exist than any belief there. It's a pity.

>>18642231
Excuse the typos. I'm tired. It's early here.

>>18642232
How can you not believe in the soul? Not judging you. To each their own. But what is so hard about that? It is as good of an explanation as you'll ever get for that "X" factor in all living things.

>>18642235
All good, I wasn't getting a bad vibe from you or anything. :-) To each their own on your end, too.

I don't believe there's something separate from the body/mind that gives us life, that's all. If we want to call the energy (at a molecular level) in all living things a 'soul' - or other things that link all living things like respiration, DNA, etc - then sure, I'm down with that. I just don't think there's anything separate from the physical.

>>18642248
Why not? If you are "science minded", science is coming closer and closer to outright saying "yeah there is more than the physical world". Be it the ones dealing in quantum physics simply trying to find out what makes everything tick, or the people as CERN trying to open up holes in the fabric of time and space.

It is becoming more accepted that more exists than we can categorize as material.

Either way you end up going, figuring it out will be hard. Took me 20 years.

How one worships is proof of how one's soul is.

Worship humanity and you worship human gods,worship nature you worship the whole. , wrship science and you worship the smalest pieces that you can cut up. Worship yourself and you can do everything possible.

>>18638979
>Who does demand worship then?
Plenty of them.
>And why does this god deserve to be worshipped?
They don't. Not a single one of them.

I praise Kek every once in a while but I do not worship them. Its whatever you choose to put effort into, feeding whatever you believe In power; thats how all large religions work. Millions of people channeling their will into one thought or idea can have wide reaching, unexplainable, almost supernatural effects. Its really just whatever, reality is what you make of it I suppose. Shadilay my friend

Krsna knowledgeables:

Is Krsna a personification of the Tao? Of the One?

>>18643779
If you are defining Tao as "Supreme Truth" or some variation, then I would say yes. But I don't think that properly fits what Tao is (as much as you can define Tao). One who has "achieved that Tao" could be said to parallel one who has achieved Brahman Realization - which is an awareness of the Absolute as a nondifferentiated, all-expansive energy/existence. But I don't think when people speak of the Tao that they are talking about a state of existence. Isn't the Tao more of a process or way of acting? In which case I might think following the Tao would be closer paralleled by the concepts of sadhana, samadhi, or bhava. It could be a way of explaining karma-yoga, or unification with the Absolute Truth through actions.

The common phrase "the Tao that can be explained is not the Tao" is similar to a process in jnana-yoga called "neti neti" or "not this, not this." The idea being that in order to find the eternal, you exclude everything temporary. Gaudiya Vaishnava understanding says the "highest" this process can get to is Brahman Realization.

>Brahman, Paramātmā and Bhagavān. The same object. So the Brahman realization is impersonal realization. Just like the sun, the sun globe, and the sunshine. They are one, but the sunshine, realization of the sunshine, is not realization of the sun globe. Or realization of the sun globe is not realization of the sun god who is within the sun globe. Vivasvān. His name is Vivasvān. The present predominating Deity in the sun planet, his name is Vivasvān. And his son Manu is called Vaivasvata Manu. This is the age of Vaivasvata Manu. So at the... This is very nice example, that the sunshine, the sun globe and the sun god. They are all one, but still, the sun globe is not the person, sun god; neither the sunshine is not the person sun, although they are one. This is called acintya-bhedābheda-tattva, inconceivably one and different simultaneously. - Prabhupada lecture, London, 7/15/73

>>18644585
By Tao and One I meant more of the concept of Intelligent Infinity. Where an undescribable being exists (that is beyond existence itself) and from "it" or "that" everything else emanated, but everything else also being the One or Tao itself.

>>18644633
Do you consider this verse similar to the concept?

>Iso Upanishad Invocation - The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.

Note: "The Personality of Godhead" is Prabhupada's personalist understanding and translation (other sects would likely call it taint/corruption) of the word aum in this context. The actual sanskrit:
oṁ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaṁ
pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate
pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya
pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

In Western philosophy I think the closest term would be panentheism, which is like a mix of pantheism and mono/henotheism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism

>>18644666
Yes that's it.

So why is the Personality of Godhead (Krsna, right?) represented as a human-like figure?

File: dasavatar.jpg (184KB, 726x944px)

184KB, 726x944px

>>18644697
I'm not entirely certain. In my opinion, these are the likely reasons:

>He wants to
>as human, we are most attracted to the human form
>the great saints and personalities of our line have described Him thus, including the authors/compilers of our canon

Of course, not all avatars are human. See the ten "main" avatars of Vishnu - the dasavatara, pic. You can also read about salagram silas, which are visually stones, but understood to be God in full, just as any deity. There is Sri Jagganath - the form of Krsna that (among other pastimes) was explicitly to show that Krsna's specific form is not rigidly set in specifics.

And to add to all this, Krishna is not different from His name, or His activities. The holy books that describe God are not just talking about God, they ARE God. I literally have God sitting in my room, if only I had the realization to see it. Krishna is represented and present 100% in His name; He is literally staring you in the face as you read this.

File: salagram silas.jpg (101KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 640x480px

These are salagram silas. There are many types, but most silas for Vishnu look similar. Different aspects in the stone reveal to those with the knowledge what specific avatar's sila they are.

>>18644666
Sounds like Demiurge worship. This world is a cage, not perfect.

>>18644733
>...but understood to be God in full, just as any deity
Does that include us? Are we also God in full?

And for the last paragraph: does that simply mean that Krishna is everything?

>>18644733
Would say that Krsna does not assume a human form for our benefit, but rather he is the original form which is then reflected in the material plane.

>>18644743
While we are bound in illusion within this material world it is still emanating from the supreme personality of godhead. Being constricted by maya has more to do with one's state of consciousness rather than physical location.

>>18644748
This returns again to the concept of acintyabhedabheda tattva. We are most certainly not god in full but are composed of the same essence. Everything is resting on Krsna's energy and he expands himself as the supersoul which pervades all existence, but Krsna's body made of sacidananda is not omnipresent.

File: jagannath-balarama-and-subhadra.jpg (124KB, 750x461px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 750x461px

And this is Jagganath, the universal lord. Beside him are Baladev (white) and Subhadra (yellow). The original deities are found in Jagganath Puri, in Odisha (east India).

>>18644743
The Demiurge - a secondary creator that opposes the true God and keeps us caged, yes? In Vaishnavism, this would be Brahma, or Maya. Brahma is a soul like us given command of creation over an entire universe. Maya is the personification of our illusion. However in our philosophy neither of these persons oppose Krishna. Brahma is one of the highest servants of god (and the father of my disciplic line), though he like all of us has the potential to fall into illusion. Maya is the dearest servant to Krishna, and her efforts at deluding us are not opposition, but her direct service. Maya's duty is to keep those who wish to be the central enjoyer here in the material realm, and because of her love for Krishna, she will perform this task ceaselessly and with great effort.

>>18644748
We are God in part. The energies of Krishna are infinite, with infinite variation. But the six goswamis - the direct disciples of Lord Chaitanya - attempted to create categories.

"Internal" energies are those that are "God in full," or paraphernalia/environments/companions that are never separated from Him through illusion.

"External" energies are those that Krishna is only indirectly in contact with. This is the Material Realm, the place of temporary actions and circumstance. It is ultimately sourced and controlled by Krishna, but in an indirect way. Kind of like a fingernail - no direct thought process or effort goes into growing your fingernails. This external energy is the only category of unconscious energy, non-living matter.

The third main category is the "marginal" energy - living souls, us. We're internal energy that sometimes becomes covered by the external. We are conscious, but we can become deluded into thinking we have connection to the unconscious.

>>18644772
>but are composed of the same essence
Perfect, this is what I was looking for.

In the End, do we become god in full? On a very long-term basis, do all souls eventually reach ascension to this perfection? Or at least join the perfection?

This might be Krsna's abode, or it might be something even higher than that?

>>18644781
Thank you, makes perfect sense.

So why are we here? Is the purpose of Creation experience itself? So that Krishna parts may eventually become whole again through experience itself?

>>18644783
The idea is to retain one's original spiritual identity in harmony with Krsna. Goloka Vrindavana is the his most intimate and confidential abode. Bhakta might be able to offer an answer in regard to the question of all souls attaining self realization.

>>18644801
>The idea is to retain one's original spiritual identity in harmony with Krsna
That's amazing honestly

In case all souls cannot attain self realization, all of them have potential and possibility, right?

>>18644800
This topics generally referred to as the fall of the jiva is a heavily debated topic within gaudiya vaishnavism. The most simple answer would be that somehow, somewhere we have forgotten Krsna which is the cause of our bondage in the material world.

>>18644810
Yes, every living being has the innate propensity to love Krsna (prema) that is currently in a dormant state. Bhakti is not an artificial imposition but rather an awakening of our real nature.

>>18644811
I meant here as in the whole of Creation itself. Why does everything exist? Why isn't Krsna just chilling by himself?

>>18644763
Hmm, yes. :)

>>18644783
>In the End, do we become god in full?
There is a form of liberation where one merges into the Brahman essence of God, but Gaudiya Vaishnavas find this situation to be almost abhorrent. Our philosophy considers loving exchanges between persons to be the highest intimacy. Thus to annihilate your personality (rather than purify it) is a form of mukti one might consider almost worse than being in Maya. In the tales, this form of liberation is also given to those demons Krishna or His avatars directly kill.

>On a very long-term basis, do all souls eventually reach ascension to this perfection? Or at least join the perfection?
Essentially yes. It is possible that a soul be in Maya perpetually, eternally striving to take the place of God, as the choice is an indivisible quality of the soul. But generally the understanding is no matter how long it takes (though shorter is better) every soul that falls into Maya will get out. And that even though a soul once tasting Maya could potentially return, such a thing almost never happens.

>This might be Krsna's abode, or it might be something even higher than that?
It isn't possible within the framework of the belief. There are other sects of Hinduism that certainly would agree Krishna's abode (as in Goloka Vrindavan) is not the highest.

>So why are we here?
Attraction to the objects of the senses, according to the Gita (2.62-63). As we are similar in quality to Krishna, we have a part of His Supreme Independence. We can use our small independence to attempt to be the Supreme. When a soul has such a desire, Krishna allows them to attempt to be the enjoyer here in the material realm. Our purpose here in this realm is basically to exhaust the desire to be God, and to return to our natural, eternal state.

>>18644816
>that is currently in a dormant state
So it only "awakens" when we reach Krsna in the end of ends? Or can one be considered to love Krsna (prema) even in this material world?

>>18644818
Interesting that demons such as Vrtrasura or Ravana actually had intense devotional potency. I believe they did not attain mukti after death but rather attained the spiritual world, though they are rare examples.

From our understanding in Gaudiya Math the souls in the material world were never with Krsna, but as srila prabhupada mentioned it is more important to ask how to leave rather than why we're here to begin with.

>>18644825
There are beings known as nitya siddhas who are eternally Krsna conscious and baddha jivas who are conditioned by the maya or the material energy. Those nitya siddhas that descend in this material realm are eternally perfect and have prema even while in the material world. Typically however the highest stage one can attain here is bhava. From there he attains prema having taken birth in Goloka as the human body cannot handle such intense spiritual moods.

>>18644818
>There are other sects of Hinduism that certainly would agree Krishna's abode is not the highest?
Could you elaborate a bit more? Only insofar as a very general description of the realms thought to be higher/highest?

And to your last paragraph, I meant here in Creation. All of Creation. Once again, why is Krsna not just alone?
Unless you did mean to answer this question, which would mean that the entirety of Creation is for us souls? For us souls to experience and then come back?

File: Spiritual_world.jpg (2MB, 2895x4374px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2895x4374px

>>18644844
Krsna is not alone so that he can experience loving relationships with others. Radha and his gopis (the cowherd girls of vraj who exemplify the highest degree of love) are essentially direct expansions of his own energy. In this esoteric sense Krsna is just enjoying himself.

File: radha-madhuram.jpg (263KB, 640x973px)

263KB, 640x973px

>>18644800
Oops, forgot to quote you in the previous post.

>Is the purpose of Creation experience itself? So that Krishna parts may eventually become whole again through experience itself?
Not in the sense that we have to learn or evolve to get to the next level. It's more of a time out for willful souls, or a prison if you wish to look at it harshly. We're meant to remember our original position. And we're away from Krishna's abode because frankly, any soul wanting to enjoy for themselves would HATE HATE HATE it in the spiritual world. EVERYTHING there is about Krishna. EVERYONE wants only to talk about Him, do stuff for Him, pay attention to Him.

You think the religious spam on /x/ is bad...

>>18644817
>Why isn't Krsna just chilling by himself?
This gets deep. The simplest answer is Radha. The eternal consort of Krishna. Krishna is the cause behind everything, even Sri Radharani. But Krishna causes everything only to please His love, Radha.

>Or can one be considered to love Krsna (prema) even in this material world?
To a person purely serving Krishna, there is no difference between the material and spiritual. But for us that have such a distinction, yes - Krishna prema can be achieved in one lifetime. There are also persons such as Narada Muni who travel throughout the material realm in service to Krishna yet remain self-realized and transcendent.

>>18644836
>I believe they did not attain mukti after death but rather attained the spiritual world, though they are rare examples.
Ravana I can understand, as he was an "incarnation" of the Jai-Vijay gatekeeper twins. Why do you include Vrtasura? I would love to hear about this.

>From our understanding in Gaudiya Math the souls in the material world were never with Krsna
Heh, sampradaya squabbles. I think much of ISKCON agrees with this, though I am not one of them. In this view, the souls that enter the Material were originally part of the Brahmajyoti, correct?

>>18644850
That is quite grand

>>18644853
About Radha, so Krsna causes everything to please His love? But Radha is also caused by Krsna? So does that mean Radha is a personification of Krsna's pure love? As in, Radha exists because Krsna wanted to love? And then because Radha exists everything else is done "only to please His love, Radha"?

And related to the other post you quoted, do you then believe that all souls are part of Krsna while the other poster (and "much of ISKCON") believe that souls exist externally from Krsna?

>>18644853
If I remember correctly, Vrtrasura was previously a king who was cursed by lord Shiva to take birth as an asura. Vrtrasura is interesting in that he expressed very advanced devotional sentiments prior to his fight with Indra even while in the body of a demon. His prayers before the exchange are quite beautiful as written in the bhagavatam, and even suggest a higher stage of bhakti than Indra (who is often prone to symptoms of a conditioned soul as you know).

>>18644842
>>18644850
Well said. This prabhu is correcting my errors. The nuances in the teachings (such as bhava/prema) are much better taught by Gaudiya Math. I think it's due to ISKCON being mostly English-speaking, and so have a much smaller pool of reading material.

>>18644853
From our perspective jivas originate in what is known as tatashta shakti or marginal energy. Some jivas look up to the spiritual world and others look down to matter in an almost arbitrary process. We believe that Srila Prabhupada expressed the idea of falling from Goloka as to prevent devotees from the misunderstanding that one could return to the impersonal tatashta shakti. There are numerous scriptural references that suggest it is impossible for a perfected soul to ever be ensnared by the illusory energy.

>>18638917
Agreed, YHWH is a major ass hole. Just read the bible to confirm that.

There's a few Gods who seem OK though. Some of the Greco-Roman and Egyptian ones are alright.

I chose to worship Minerva. Worst she ever did was turn some arrogant bitch into a spider.

I'm also inclined to agree with >>18638948. Pretty sure something powerful enough to create everything (possibly including the other gods) doesn't have such a small, feeble ego that he requires us ants to praise and worship him.

>>18644853
>There are also persons such as Narada Muni who travel throughout the material realm in service to Krishna yet remain self-realized and transcendent.

One of my favorite devotees. The story of his spiritual journey and exchanges with the Lord as described in the bhagavatam is absolutely sublime. Also exemplifies the incredibly potency of sadhu sanga and krsna prashad.

>As in, Radha exists because Krsna wanted to love? And then because Radha exists everything else is done "only to please His love, Radha"?

This is where things get very esoteric but that is a good general understanding.

Both ISKCON and Gaudiya math siddhanta understand there to be some jivas in the spiritual world and some in the material. The debate is centered around how those jivas were fettered by maya to begin with initially.

>>18644872
We're getting to the limits of my understanding. Canonically, Krishna is the cause of everything, the uncaused, the Supreme Origin. Esoterically, Krishna says he is brought under the sway of and controlled by devotional love, of whom no one has more than Radha - the embodiment of bhakti. Also, as these are eternal beings, the concept of one existing and then the other existing is removed. Both have always existed, as we and everything have always existed.

>And then because Radha exists everything else is done "only to please His love, Radha"?
To enjoy with Radha, Krishna has the spiritual world as a backdrop, and His friends and Her friends as compatriots to increase the variety of enjoyable events, and families and cities and adversaries to overcome all the infinite everything so Their enjoyment can expand infinitely.

>do you then believe that all souls are part of Krsna while the other poster (and "much of ISKCON") believe that souls exist externally from Krsna?
Hrmm, the dispute we are talking about is whether the soul currently in Maya was "originally" a person in the spiritual world serving Krishna, or whether that soul was a "merged essence" existing as a spiritual "photon" of Brahman. In both cases the soul is a part of Krishna, though eternally a distinct personality.

>>18644873
Ohhhhh! I know who you mean now. I was confusing him with Vrkasura - the one who gained the power to kill someone by touching their head.

>>18644882
This makes a lot of sense. I will say much of my understanding came from Prabhupada's words in talks and interviews, as I did not trust myself to properly discern it.

>>18644899
>Both have always existed, as we and everything have always existed.

Would be a good time to segway into the advent of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu for the new devotee. While there are several reasons for his coming, the prime reason is that Krsna wanted to experience the love that Radha feels for him, and so he descends as a devotee of himself. In an esoteric sense he is also Radha Krsna combined into one being. Secondly he also desired to spread Krsna Prema indiscriminately regardless of previous qualification. Our taking birth in a kali yuga in which Chaitanyadeva has appeared is extremely, extremely auspicious.

>>18644899
>these are eternal beings

But isn't Krsna the real one eternal being if everything came from Him? I understand the concept that souls are eternal in our concept of time and in the material sense, but how can these be eternal if they have a source? Something having a source implies that the source exists before everything, a first mover.

>>18644913
Difficult question. Would say that we are the eternal part and parcels of Krsna who have always existed and will always continue to exist.

>>18644956
Ah, so we're built of the same eternity that Krsna is built from, yet we still emanate from Him? (we as in the entirety of everything else that is not-Krsna)

>>18644963
Whether the jiva has an origin or has always existed (which I will check with my gurudeva) Krsna remains the cause of all causes and the origin of all.

Also meaning to inquire if you have begun chanting harinam on tulsi and if you have begun following the regulative principles.

File: Lord Chaitanya as Radha-Krishna.jpg (90KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 800x600px

>>18644913
It feels like a cop-out for me to say here "yes, this is acintya, the inconceivable." I am quick to go to analogies, as I feel is our philosophical tendency, but there are no good analogies in the temporary for the eternal.

The word creator I agree becomes moot when everything is eternal (except for karma - the temporary, material actions). Source is a little better, as it gives the implication of required-to-maintain, but I agree it still has a temporal connotation. Perhaps better words to use are Center, Enjoyer, or Origin (as in Cartesian Axis). To give the impression not of one and then the other, but of being both the center of, and the entirety of, the infinite.

For my mind, mathematical concepts are a nice aid. Such as a number line is the infinite whole made up of individual numbers, the infinitesimal parts. Each number is distinct, but each number is also unified in being part of the One number line. So too is each soul an infinitesimal part of the Infinite One, yet all are distinct. And as a Cartesian graph does not "start" at the origin and temporally "cause" the rest of the coordinates, still there is the Origin, which sustains and defines all the infinite parts of the graph.

As Krishna puts it:
>Bg 7.6 All created beings have their source in these two natures. Of all that is material and all that is spiritual in this world, know for certain that I am both the origin and the dissolution.
>Bg 7.7 O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me. Everything rests upon Me, as pearls are strung on a thread.

SB 2.9.34 O Brahmā, whatever appears to be of any value, if it is without relation to Me, has no reality. Know it as My illusory energy, that reflection which appears to be in darkness.
SB 2.9.35 O Brahmā, please know that the universal elements enter into the cosmos and at the same time do not enter into the cosmos; similarly, I Myself also exist within everything created, and at the same time I am outside of everything.

Perhaps think of it in a linguistic sense. Certain words imply or even necessitate the existence of their paired word. What is a king without a kingdom? Which comes first? (Technically a charismatic person daring to give themselves a title, but for analogy's sake...) They define each other, and arise simultaneously. Enjoyer and Enjoyed. Energetic and Energy.

>>18644970
>>18644981

Alright. Seems like I've reached somewhat of a barrier in what can be taught (as opposed to something experienced)

Well, these are all the questions I have for now. Surely more will come later, hopefully thread is still up.

Both of you have been a great help in my initial understanding of Krsna. There's a lot of things I need to reconcile with my own experiences and concepts I know to be true, and so far this seems like a very possible end point to my spiritual progress on this incarnation. What I'm saying is I'm not yet a Vaishnavist (or what it's called)

I'm still plenty far away from a life of devotion, though, and a long journey awaits me, I'm not yet ready to settle into a life of pure devotion, I still have some more of Maya to experience.

I am starting soon though, and as I begin soon I will also start chanting and following the principles.

Thank you both for helping me in this, though I can imagine the satisfaction of sharing your knowledge is more than enough for you

>>18645010
There are no hard and fast rules. Even saying the mahamantra once is beneficial. Of course to be admitted as member of the different organizations or initiated into the disciplic line would require strict adherence to their specific practice. And as this yoga is about awareness and motive more than anything, certainly a symptom of those would be an increase in devotional activity.

>I'm not yet ready to settle into a life of pure devotion, I still have some more of Maya to experience.
You are better than me. This candor might be better in the long run than jumping in too deep too quick. Although such brashness is lauded a number of times in the texts. I definitely feel a karmic backlash in my life having accepted and rejected such a merciful opportunity as living with the devotees. Thank you for letting me spend some time tonight in the presence of Krishna by sharing this with you.

>>18645010
The beauty of bhakti is that one can approach it whether full of material desires or being devoid of any interest in this world. Krsna will arrange whatever needs to take place as long as you are sincere. Wishing you much success on your spiritual journey.

>>18639448
krishina is just the 9th avatar of vishnu, iskcon has renouced hinduism and took only whats conviniete its more cult than religion at this point its blasphemous claim are destructive to the rest of hinduism taking away from it the things that make it what it is, claim one god over all others. it is christianized and even the founder who claims to be direct liniage misinterprets some of the gitas passages.... such as telling us we should" focus our eyes on our tip of our nose" as krishnas exospition on how to meditate hahah the actualy meaning is the root of the nose between the eyebrows thats just one example

>>18641502
krishna is not refering to himself as being the sole creater he is refering to being one with the universe as the whole and thus being the creator in that sense as we all are, we are just yet to realise and feel it, krishna had realised it and was thus explaining it as he, but taken by your perspective it appears as though krishina then is more of a christian/judaism version of god, which is whats terrible wrong with ISKCON

>>18642141
you first.

>>18645138
>>18645144
What are your arguments/evidences towards your claims?

File: Four Sampradaya - Four Disciplic Succession Acharayas.jpg (144KB, 1017x888px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1017x888px

>>18645254
Most branches of Vaishnavism view Vishnu as Supreme, with Krishna being an avatar of Vishnu. The elevation of Krishna is unique to Gaudiya Vaishnavas, followers of Lord Chaitanya who was on the Earth 500 years ago. However, it is not ISKCON unique, and the personalist philosophy of our line of Vaishnavism descends from Madhvacarya. A Veda Vyasa, the compiler of the Vedas, wrote the Bhagavata Purana to extol bhakti. And though there is a different understanding of the Bhagavat Purana's origin materially, even then you can follow the devotional path into antiquity without Christian influence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavata_Purana#Origin.2C_chronology_and_inconsistent_manuscripts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvars
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhvacharya
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaitanya_Mahaprabhu

Christianity I would also say is a path of bhakti so naturally there are similarities. The personalist understanding is not the common conception of Hinduism, but it is not some bastardized pastiche of karma=original sin and sticking extra arms onto Jesus.

Feel free to compare Prabhupda's commentary on the Gita with the four commentaries of the founders of the Vaishnava branches.
http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-01-01.html

>>18645254
my argument is as stated

>>18645254
i cant enjoy krishna because the claims of ISKCON goes against what i know about hinduism with the claims of him being the supreme, even higher than brahman which causes conflict in me, as it seems to create an unneeded divide in the differant sects none should be claimed to be higher or supreme over another.

>>18645315
>worshiping anything but Kali
its like you dont want results

Guardian
Of
Debt

Why worship him?

>>18645326
You have no argument friend, you only stated claims

Claims are useless without something to back them up, be it facts, rhetoric, or arguments.

>>18645339
What do you believe in, then? What does the cosmology look like in your belief system?

>>18645138
The question of whether Vishnu or Krsna is the original is not very important as they are both plenary expansions. The bhagavatam describes the pastimes of both Krsna and Vishnu as they are basically the same entity.

>>18645046
>>18645047
I'm back.

After careful consideration and meditation, I have decided I will not pursue the path of Krsna/Krsna Consciousness.

My spiritual journey in this incarnation differs from that of deity worship and my beliefs do not align with the type of worship needed.

Through my understandings based on this thread however, it is certain that your cosmology is the same as mine. I will also likely be meditating and chanting upon Krsna's names but only insofar as to align myself with what I term the Intelligent Infinity that Krsna represents.

Thank you still for the information you gave me, it cleared up quite a few doubts of mine.

>>18648411
Best of fortune on your path.

>Bg 12.10 — If you cannot practice the regulations of bhakti-yoga, then just try to work for Me, because by working for Me you will come to the perfect stage.
>Bg 12.11 — If, however, you are unable to work in this consciousness of Me, then try to act giving up all results of your work and try to be self-situated.
>Bg 12.12 — If you cannot take to this practice, then engage yourself in the cultivation of knowledge. Better than knowledge, however, is meditation, and better than meditation is renunciation of the fruits of action, for by such renunciation one can attain peace of mind.