Hare Krishna Prabhujis and Matajis.

I am from Surat, Gujarat.  My father and I have been member of ISKCON Surat since 15 years and my father was very dedicated towards ISKCON Surat and has been chanting rounds of Hare Krishna Mahamantra since last 15 years and also regularly attending ISKCON Sunday Feast and so am I.  But recently, my father was provided a copy of Satyarth Prakash by Dayanand Saraswati.  He is very much influenced by the book and is now confused whether the Supreme Lord is personal or impersonal.  As per Satyarth Prakash, the Supreme Lord is impersonal and Krishna and Rama were very intelligent human-beings.  My father is very much convinced by this and is very confused whether to believe ISKCON ideology or this Arya Samaj.  

I am very much convinced that the Krishna is the supreme Lord and no one is above or equal to him.  I have thoroughly read Bhagwad Gita-as it is, Krsna, Nector of Devotion and now reading Srimad Bhagvatam (reached Second Canto).  I have no doubt about the supremacy of Krishna.  Yesterday, I and my father had a very healthy discussion, you can call it debat, on personal feature of impersonal feature of Supreme Lord.  I want to further state that my father is well-versed with the ideology of ISKCON as he has been actively involved with the ISKCON, Surat since last 15 years and now he is so much convinced by the Arya Samaj Theory.  Father is still chanting his rounds but he tell me that he is not feeling any change by chanting hare krishna mahamantra.  However, earlier, say 6-7 years ago, he used to say that he has experienced very positive change after he started chanting hare krishna mahamantra.

My father told me that he is not aginst ISKCON ideology but actually confused about what is real and what is not.  So he says that he will do futher research in this matter.  I am so much in pain after seeing my father talk like this after having associated with ISKCON for 15 years.  Change in my father's thinking has not affected by faith in ISKCON and my faith that Krishna is everything and everything is Krishna.  

I even tried to explain him that Lord Krishna himself has said in Bhagwad Gita that he is the Surpeme Lord and not a blade of grass moves without his wish.  I even cited slokas from Brahma Samhita where Brahma ji cited that Govinda is the cause of all causes.  But he says that as per Satyarth Prakash, the shastras have been manipulated by the brahmanas and they are not 100% dependable.  He says that as per Vedas, God is impersonal and nowhere is it written that God has a shape.  That Krishna and Rama were great human personalities and the Shastra have been manipulated.

I am very much disturbed by this and needs your help and valuable guidance.  Even my mother who reads Bhagwad Gita as it is regularly is confused by my fathers's sudden change in thinking.  Please Help.

Hare Krishna

You need to be a member of ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT to add comments!

Join ISKCON Desire Tree | IDT

Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • thanks, i like when prabhupada says from that site that does actaully anybody even believe that krishna even exsists?

  • Hare Krishna Prabhu ji!

    PAMHO

    don't worry. your father is chanting, so he will understand the sidhanta again. meanwhile, tell him how bhagavatam is still as it is! there has been no change in the bhagavatam because all the devotees were consistenly writing commentaries on it. the 10th canto of shrimad bhagavatm shows lila of lord krishna and can a impersonal being have any lilas? here are few more points-

    god is perfect. if he's perfect but doesn't have a personal form, isn't that an imperfection?

    we are god's children. can it be that the father is impersonal but the son is personal?

    Hare Krishna

    • main reason he have this conception is simple.. he didnt read bhagavatam

  • So Bhagavad Gita has been manipulated but much older Vedas have not? I myself don't trust the scriptures very much; i trust my guru more: Neem Karoli Baba. Baba used to do miracles like resurecting a dead person, giving eyesight to blind, turning water into ghee, etc. and he used to encourage chanting God's name(s).

    He said "Ram's form left this world, Krishna's form left this world, but the name stays. By reciting his name, everything is achieved." Shaking his head, he reiterated, "Everything is achieved."

    Here's an incident related to Neem Karoli Baba:

    ~~~

    Kishan Lal Sah, a teacher from Ramgarh, Nainital often visited   Kainchi to have Baba's darshan. His devotion was such that Baba was both his guru and God.

    Inspite of his deep faith, Kishan Lal was feeling depressed. He was disturbed by the evil seen in the world and by his own lack of spiritual progress. One day he went to Kainchi with the thought of discussing the matter with Baba.

    When he arrived, Kishan Lal saw Baba sitting on one end of the wooden bridge over the river. He went to him and bowed reverently.

    Before he could ask anything, Baba said, "You see others trapped by maya(illusion). Narada and Bharata were entrapped by maya. These great sages were entrapped by it, so what is there to say about others?"

    Kishan Lal felt that there was no need to question Baba further.

    On a different occasion Sah went to Baba with innumerable questions on spirituality. He greeted Baba, who was lying in his kuti(room), but he could not think of which question to ask first. Baba selected one important question from the unexpressed ones and answered it without being asked.

    Baba said, "This temple and whatever is seen by the human eye are illusion. What can you do about it ?"

    This led to other questions and doubts in Kishan Lal's mind. Baba again answered them without being asked. Baba said, "Delusion makes everything look real."

    Kishan Lal thought that there should be a way out. Baba answered, "Attachment is only dispelled by grace."

    How can one obtain grace, came to Sah's mind. Baba said,"Constant repetition of God's name, even without feelings of devotion, in anger or lethargy, brings out his grace. Once this is realized, there is no room for misgivings."

    ~~~

    • Hare Krishna

      Prabhu ji, I had a humble question for neem karoli baba so if you can ask him... or maybe he'll answer even before you ask him! considering how great he is.

      what is the proof given in the scriptures that everything is an illusion?

      Iskcon is completely shastrik and the devotees have shastrik proof for everysingle practice they do (including deity service and making temple) I know about shastras telling how deity service is great and about making temples so, I have no doubt about it. but I feel that if I just trust your baba because he is so great, that is blind faith. so let's not fall into that right? kindly ask baba about my question. I would like to dispel it as soon as possible

      Hare Krishna

      • Hare Krishna Ma'm,

        "what is the proof given in the scriptures that everything is an illusion?"

        Prabhupada's translation of Bhagavad Gita 2.16: ( https://asitis.com/2/16.html )

        "Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance, and of the existent there is no cessation. This seers have concluded by studying the nature of both."

        If earthly temples would have been "existent" then they would be having "no cessation", but instead they cease over time, so they are "nonexistent", according to the above translation.

        It's like when Ramana Maharshi said: "What is not continuous cannot be real. If real, the thing must ever be real - and not real for a short time and unreal at other times.".

        I didn't ask your question to Baba because he has already said what he has said, and i don't want to ask him for scriptural proof for what he has said, especially when i myself don't trust what people call as "scriptures". Like if Krishna appears in front of you and gives you some knowledge, i don't think you would ask him for proof from scriptures for what he's teaching you.

        "if I just trust your baba because he is so great, that is blind faith. so let's not fall into that right?"

        You would rather have blind faith on scriptures? We don't know who wrote the scriptures, why should we trust the writers & translators of the scriptures, we don't know whether scriptures have been modified over time since they were written so long ago, and there are contradictions in scriptures. In the Gita, Krishna has said that he's God. I was reading Mahabharata; in it i was suprised to find a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna that after the war was over, they both were in palace, Arjuna asked Krishna to repeat the Gita, then Krishna replied that even he (Krishna) has forgotten it. If Krishna is God then how can he forget his own words, but that's what's written in scripture Mahabharata, of which Gita is part of. In Srimad Bhagavatam ( https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/10/89/58/ ), Maha Vishnu said to Krishna and Arjuna: "I wanted to see the two of you, My expansions, who have descended to the earth to save the principles of religion.". If Krishna is God then how can he be an expansion of another being? But i still consider Krishna to be God because Neem Karoli Baba used to consider him God. I've been using "used to" with Neem Karoli Baba because Baba has left his body.. but still he has been giving darshan to people after that.

        You wanted proof from scriptures to which i replied to you BG 2.16 Prabhupada's translation. Are you satisfied dear sister?

        Bhagavad Gita As It Is Original by Prabhupada
        Bhagavad Gita is Krishna's battlefield discussion with Arjuna. By A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. With search engine, art gallery, original Sans…
        • Hare Krishna Prabhu ji!
          dear brother, I'm still not satisfied... because, if srila prabhupada meant it in this way, then would he establish so many temples? kindly read the purport my dear brother. it is based on body. not deities. and the scriptures are written by ved vyas who is the literary incarnation of the supreme personality of godhead. all the doubts you had about the scriptures can be easily dispelled by vaishnavas so please visit the nearest iskcon temple and ask them. since you consider me as your sister, I am saying this as a matter of concern just like a sister show towards her brother

          Hare Krishna

          • Ma'm i've a request that please don't call me "Prabhu" :)

            "if srila prabhupada meant it in this way, then would he establish so many temples? kindly read the purport my dear brother. it is based on body"

            So why did Prabhupada used to eat food to maintain his body if he meant that body is an illusion? If something is an illusion doesn't mean it's not useful. Earthly temples are also useful despite being illusion. Maharajji (Neem Karoli Baba) said "The people are becoming indifferent to righteous thoughts and actions. The worst time is ahead and only these temples will remind us of God.".

            In the verse, if Krishna meant human body then he would have said human body but he gave a general statement for all temporary things. I think we should care more about what Krishna meant instead of what Prabupada meant. I read the purport now, i don't see Prabhupada at fault here, he is talking about human body as Krishna is giving a general statement and applying it to human body to convince Arjuna to fight.

            Temple and human body both exist in the same world in the same level of reality, both are made of neutrons, protons, electrons, both are temporary, but you're saying one is real and other is illusion, right? Does this seem logical to you?

            "the scriptures are written by ved vyas"

            Even Mandukya Upanishad? -which is one of the basis of Advaita Vedanta and Advaita Vedanta is seemingly disliked by ISKCON members.

            • Hare Krishna

              That is vaishnava etiquette so I'm sorry but I will call you prabhu ji

              we need to maintain our body because we have got this human form after millions of lives just to serve shri Krishna and we should offer our body to shri Krishna, so don't you think it should be well maintained?

              so you're saying that shri krishna meant that even temple is an illusion, right? shri Krishna came in kaliyug as chaitanya mahaprabhu and we all know his past times in jaganath puri temple.

              true, even temples are made of all that, but afterwards, those vaishnavas who have got darshan of the lord in their mind, invoke that darshan into the deity, thus invoking the lord in the deity. by the way, don't you believe krishna is everywhere? prahladh maharaj could see narsimha deva in a piller also! god is eveywhere and true devotees can see him in anything! but can't we just see him in his vigraha avatar when he's just standing in front of us for our deliverance! now, if you want to say that if god is everywhere, then why make temples, water is also everywhere (water vapours) but can we just drink it like that? no! we need it to be in a drinkable form!

              that is why, we don't read those scriptures which are based on anything like that. we make sure that scriptures are either written by ved vyas or someone who comes in disciplic succession

              and prabhu ji, I don't want to extend this discussion any further since the topic of this thread is not that. but i just want to say that if you really want to understand bhakti, you'll have to take shelter of scriptures. I'm pretty sure you know that we should meditate on shri krishna's form but since you don't trust scriptures, how would you know what he looks like? this is the last time I'm commenting something on this discussion thread because we are diverting from the topic. but please try to understand the glories of the scriptures and the archa vigraha form of krishna. it would not come in 9 devotional sevices to god if it was an illusion right?

              Hare Krishna

              • "so don't you think it should be well maintained?"

                Ma'm i never said that. On the contrary for the question "So why did Prabhupada used to eat food to maintain his body if he meant that body is an illusion?" i said "If something is an illusion doesn't mean it's not useful.".

                 

                "so you're saying that shri krishna meant that even temple is an illusion, right?"

                Yes

                 

                "don't you believe krishna is everywhere?" "if you want to say that if god is everywhere"

                I don't. And your question is seeming a hard philosophical question to me :|

                 

                "how would you know what he looks like?"

                Neem Karoli Baba used to consider the popular form of Krishna as God.

                 

                "it would not come in 9 devotional sevices to god if it was an illusion right?"

                Illusion can be useful.

This reply was deleted.