Ok, let's make it simple. I am a skeptic. I pride myself on reasoning. So, which texts would be more convincing to me?
This thread started out with Libertine asking some very sincere questions that could have answers in Vedic philosophy. Rather than uniting and trying to answer his questions, some of us that have knowledge of Vedic philosophy are beginning to get carried away with what is looking to become a philosophical squabble. As a follower of Srila Prabhupada, I directed Libertine to two of his most basic writings, ones that would open his eyes to the existence and concepts of Vedic knowledge and introduce him to a distinct branch of it as well. Libertine seems like a very intelligent guy who evaluates and questions; I don't think he will instantly become brainwashed by reading Prabhupada's books...it's much more likely that if Vedic philosophy appeals to him, he will want to become familiar with all aspects of it. Since the purpose here is to get some knowledge in the hands of an inquiring person, I will address only one of your points now: --I think there are some Harvard scholars that would disagree with your statement that Prabhupada "incorrectly manipulated" Sanskrit. He translated and commented on the Gita from his own philosophical point of view...many others have done the same. Are you a Sanskrit scholar with similar qualifications? --Your use of the phrase "limited following" regarding ISKCON is negative and misleading. As Christianity has many, many branches in America, so Hinduism has in India. I think "relatively small but with a strong, established presence and identity" better describes ISKCON in India. There is a main road in Vrindavan named for Srila Prabhupada. ISKCON temples in the U.S. have very strong Indian congregations, and many Indians are disciples of Prabhupada's Western disciples.
In the light of the direction this thread has taken, I'm going to add "Autobiography of a Yogi" and Paramahansa Yogananda's tranlation of the Bhagavad-gita to the two A.C Bhaktivedanta books that I suggested to you earlier. It's a lot of reading, but these are all great books geared to Westerners and should be very fascinating if you do take an interest. Link to order books from Self-Realization Fellowship: https://www.srfbooks.com/Home.asp?l=1 I don't think anyone here can disagree that this choice of books will give a well rounded introduction to Indian/Vedic philosophy, yoga, etc. Peace, and happy reading!
Check out the history of ISKCON since Prabhupada's death too - you'll find that the sucessors he appointed all turned out to be phoneys. Several were involved in heavy criminal activity also. Details at http://mitglied.lycos.de/gbc/black/bogus4.htm Not only is Bhaskar right in saying Prabhupada twists the meaning of everything, but he was evidently not a very sound judge of character either.
I've been around ISKCON for a long time...know all the bad stories, and a lot of really good ones. There's a man here who wanted some advice and direction. I gave him the best I know. All you've done is make negative comments, with no attempt to help the person asking.
I think a western person who has looked more deeply can see the obvious flaws and limitations even without being able to read sanskrit. But my advice to anyone who is interested would be to look at the persons ISKCON now have as gurus. Try talking to ISKCON devotees, and you'll find a very closed minded and narrow group of people. An Indian friend of mine described it, half joking, as 'hinduism lite' - actually, a fair assesment in some ways. Incidentally, my own favourite english version of the Gita with commentary, is Sri Aurobindo's.
Actually, I'd disagree - I have tried on this thread to help Libertine's query. I have made positive comments on the meaning of the term Atman, and I've only criticized where I feel criticism is due. I feel that reading Prabhupada's books isn't a useful intro to hindu philosophy. Most people who are into them never move on or read anything else. I have met many ISCKON devotees since the 70's, and never met one yet who I felt had any real enlightenment or liberation. Several friends of mine were involved with one of the 11 bogus gurus SP appointed, and had their lives severely fucked over for their trouble. Sorry to put it in those terms, but it's truth. even now, one is speedfreak, another an alcoholic. Just recently I was at a big festival in England, and ISKCON were there. I even tried to get into the kirtan - but it was so phoney - the whole spiritual vibration was sadly absent. It was more like watching a display of cultivated and forced emotionalism. At best, it represents the lowest end of the very wide spectrum of hinduism. I don't say this because I have a guru I'm tring to promote - I don't. But quite honestly, even if there was some seed of light in Prabhupada's bringing ISKCON to the west, that has died completely a long time ago.
If you've had negative experiences with and perceptions about ISKCON, that's the way it is....kind of like my experiences with some Christians and evangelical Christianity in general. Leaves a real bad taste that's very hard to shake. I can't be honest and still claim my long association with ISKCON has been 100% positive...I was around for all the bad stuff, at least in close hearing distance, but have also known some great devotees and can only say that my spiritual awakening and a true longterm improvement of character have come from Krishna Consciousness. For this I owe an unpayable debt to Srila Prabhupada. The seed is still there, I assure you. Anyway, forgive me for popping off...after I wrote that last post I regretted doing so, because you were only adding your personal experiences and cautions to the discussion in a well-intentioned manner.
Well I know that yoga is a science and something that can be verified I will suggest a study and practice of yoga and literature regarding it
First of all, I would much rather trust a scholar from India than one from Harvard, for they have simply knowledge of the language, but no intimacy with the culture and dont actually live it. Ask a Hindu about Hinduism, not an outside scholar no matter how many PhDs he may have. As for your question, I may not be a scholar, but i am sufficiently well versed in sanskrit to be able to pick out very many serious flaws in SP's translation. As someone who lived 22 years in various parts of India, I can tell you that in pretty much every place I have been, ISKON is regarded as a joke. Bill called it Hinduism-lite. I say that ISKON is to Hinduism wha Taco Bell is to Mexican food. And almost all Hindu temples in USA are ISKON temples, so really there is no choice for Indians here if they need to go to temples.
I agree with bhaskar ISKCON is marketed and caters to the foreign segment It has no standing among native Hindu's of India and here too the ISKCON gurus are involved in petty fights over land ,money ,succesors etc They do some good also as they are able to generate a vast amount of funds I do not like their temple structure's The one in bangalore is absolutely disgusting One can observe the presence of glass and concrete in their temples like in modern corporate offices ! ISKON is big business !! I wish them all the best and hope they soon suceed in making it to the fortune 500 list I consider the structure of the above temple as a reminder to the corruption that we all need to watch out for in our times
Same in Europe. And it's a shame because I think many are put off hinduism, probably for life, by what they experience in ISKCON temples - Also agree with HH that the temples they build are not exactly pleasing, either from an architectural or environmental point of view.. And the whole presentation is somewhat Disney like....
half-hippie, Bhaskar, Black Bill: Once again, the experiences you've had with ISKCON and your perceptions are what's happened with you and that's the way it is...I certainly have no basis on which to dispute your claims. I've been pretty isolated in my ISKCON experience...many years ago in college and then since 1985 in Dallas, Texas, my home town. ISKCON Dallas, despite all the problems, has held together well as a temple community and a spiritual/cultural center for a good segment of the large Indian community in this area. Most of these Indians are highly educated professionals and their donations are a major source of financial support for the Dallas and Houston Hare Krishna temples. The conclusion could be drawn that these Indian-born Hindus feel that there is something of value in their association with ISKCON. There are also the large Dallas Hindu Temple and several other smaller Hindu congegations here, but the Hare Krishna temple and the Hindu Temple are the two biggest in the area. The Hare Krishna temple is a very long drive from where most of the local Indian population lives, but they still come in large numbers. I've also visited ISKCON temples in Los Angeles and London...in London, particularly, Indians were conspicuously present. Bhaskar, you said that Indians in America have "no choice" but to go to ISKCON temples...I'll put a positive spin on that and give Srila Prabhupada credit for establishing these temples...because of his efforts, Indians have had somewhere to go, for a good long time. I don't see any evidence that the Indians here are unhappy with the Hare Krishna temple...as a group, they seem quite enthusiastic. The Dallas temple president is an Indian-born Brahmin and was educated as a lawyer. I'll stand by the advice I gave Libertine: Srila Prabhupada's books are a good introduction to Indian spiritual culture for Western people, as are Paramahansa Yogananda's.
Spook - The problem I find is that whenever I interact with ISKCON people, there is always some negative element, and an element of un-reality. The attitude they have is at best described as depracating. What I mean is that because in their own eyes they are the only ones following the true path and all others are on a lower rung of the ladder (if they're even on the ladder at all), they tend to think thay they are on a higher plane than those they are talking to. They don't actually seem to have much spiritual discernment at all. They automatically look down on everyone else. But most of them are too ignorant of other systems to make any intelligent or meaningful criticism or even comment. I am not into being preached at by kids who were as yet unborn when I was first reading the Gita and experimenting with yoga etc., or being informed by them that other teachers, of whom they actually know nothing, are either charlatans or worse. But that is the sum of my recent interaction with ISKCON devotees. That's the problem with partisanship with only one man's works and rejection of everything else. It leaves a person with no knowledge of anything else. From such a position it is impossible to offer any kind of real spiritual guidance to others. All that can be offered is a blanket condemnation of other paths, and a 'one-size-fits-all' formula as a solution. That in itself is wholly alien to what I see as the real spirit of hinduism, which has always accepted and welcomed diversity. And wearing traditional Indian clothes outside in a British winter is simple lack of adaptation to nature.
I asked because when I was 20 I had a... experience... where I seemed to completely understand myself and in so doing my, um, mind I suppose, seemed to expand. Euphoria, visions of astral travelling (whilst conscious and walking across a park), at one point I was aware of this girl I had met coming up the stairs to my flat and opened the door for her b4 she knocked, it was like a fizzy poppy feeling. I felt things outside my body as if my nervous system was wired in to the universe. There was a feeling of unity at least with the human race but with the planet and universe as a whole. Does enlightenment last your whole life? Cos I haven't really hung on to the feeling. Residuals certainly. My life has had a direction since which it didn't have before, and I do still feel the energy flow but it's the energies around me that I feel, where I can see the places I feel them. Buddhists believe that the self is an illusion which we must try to see through, not that it doesn't exist. I thouroughly believe in what someone was describing as god being the sum of all souls and not distinct from it. Psychologists call it (the human part of it anyway) the collective unconscious. That is the direction I came at it from.
Experiences like you describe come to some people. In some cases quite spontaneously, or through yoga or some other practice - trance dancing for example, or drugs such as lsd. I'm not sure what you mean by enlightenment when you ask if it lasts a lifetime. I think if it is enlightenment, then it should last in some way. But I think it's more usual to experience things in terms of phases of consciousness. If you have an experience of other dimensions of consciousness or being, then it usually has an ongoing effect on life, even after the experience is gone. Or can open up something permanently. In hinduism, the highest state of consciousness attained through yoga is samhadi. In that state, it is said that consciousness returns to it's own source - an eternal consciousness-bliss-being. When you say Buddhists don't say the self is inexistent but that it's an illusion, I think it's one and the same thing implied. An illusion cannot be reality, so it can't be said to exist.
Black Bill...I've had the same experiences as you have, more or less, but many positive ones as well....if I hadn't I certainly wouldn't still be associated with ISKCON after all these years. Being very middle-aged, I do find it both amusing and irritating when a kid near young enough to be my grandchild comes up and lays on the preaching, without bothering to find out anything about me. It rarely happens, and when it does I just walk away. Fortunately, there are devotees around my age or older, some younger, who are mature and well rounded individuals with a vision beyond just ISKCON, and those are my real friends in ISKCON. The reason that I consider Prabhupada's teachings so important is because they clearly take another position than the standard Hindu/Yogic doctrine of the impersonal "self" as the highest spiritual reality. The concept of existing eternally as a distinct spiritual person has much more appeal to me than just merging into impersonal spirit or void....maybe this is my deep seated Christian roots showing themselves. Prabhupada states in his writings that that yogis who worship and seek the impersonal Brahman are genuine spiritualists, because the impersonal Brahman is a feature of Krishna...but he considers Bhakti the most important and most effective approach. It was those that teach or follow the idea that human beings can realize that beyond their material "illusion" they are actually God, that Prabhupada strongly condemned.
It is not your christian roots showing themselves, it is your total lack of understanding of the concept of brahman and enlightenment. First of all the term impersonal is horribly inaccurate. Brahman is the very self of all beings, our true identity. That is not impersonal, it is the most personal, most intimate thing in the world - your own inner self. Next: The moment you get enlightenment, it is not that you immediately vaporize into pure energy and merge with the universe. Ramana Maharishi explains that both the man of enlightenment and the ignorant person function through the body. The only difference is that the wise man does not identify with the body, knowing it to be but a vehicle or instrument, whereas the ignorant think they are the body (dehatma bhavena jadau samanau). The difference between before and after is only this: after enlightenment, we are free from the bondage of body and mind, and so remain ever peaceful and joyous. When the body dies, there is no change, since it has long ago been transcended. Finally: Your desire to remain a distinct spiritual person seems to me to be merely another trick of the ego, fighting for survival. Sri Krishna clearly explains, all that is born must die. That which is unborn is only the Atman, which is eternal and One. However it is true that great devotees of saguna brahman, the avatars of Brahman, end up staying in Vaikuntha loka forever. However, even these devotees have the knowledge of Brahman and know that Vishnu, Rama, Krishna, are all nothing but that Brahman in physical form and that merging in brahman is no different from the bliss of bhakti. You will find extensive elucidation of this point in the Ramacharitmanas by Goswami Tulsidasji and in Srimad Bhagavatam (though probably in SP's translation). Bahunam janmanaam ante jnanavaan maan prapadyate vaasudevaha sarvam iti sa mahatma sudurlabhaha After many births, the wise man finally surrenders to me, saying Krishna is all, such a great soul is rare. Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 7, verse 19. Vasudeva sarvam iti. Krishna is all. All is Krishna. In everything and everywhere is Krishna. These statements are repeated in the Gita in various places. And in this context the terms brahman and Krishna are used interchangeably. However there is a contradiction here: If Krishna is in all, including me, then who is surrendering to whom? It is explained that the wise man surrenders his ego and his attachments to the body and mind to his own higher self, thereby realizing that Vaasudeva is everything. The word vaasudeva itself indicates brahman - sarvatra vasati devaha yat, tat vaasudevaha (that divinity which exists everywhere). Nowhere does it say everything excluding me is Krishna. To look at it differntly, in the 4th verse of gopika Geetam (Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto 10, Chapter 31) the gopikas tell Krishna, na kahlu gopika nandano bhavaan, akhilam dehinaam antaratma dhrik (you are not the son of Yashoda, you are the inner self of all beings). Now Krishna instructs us repeatedly that we are neither body nor the mind, but the inner self. Therefore, clearly, Krishna is with every one of us, as our own self, or, in plain words, we are all Krishna alone. Further note that Krishna advices Arjuna to be a yogi always (tasmad yogi bhavarjuna Geeta chapter 6, verse 46). What is a yogi? The word yogi means one who has attained yogi (yogam prapsyati yogi). What is yoga? The word yoga means oneness, union. Thus Krishna himself advices us to constantly aim to be one who has achieved oneness with him. I rest my case.
