All Philosophies Are Mayavadi (Morning Walk)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 12 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 62

  • @ajitsinghyadav8603
    @ajitsinghyadav8603 6 років тому +8

    Jai Srila Prabhupada!!!!!

  • @108Jivatma
    @108Jivatma 5 років тому +6

    Jai Srila Prabhupada. Totalitarian war against maya and all other religious conceptions, said Srila Saraswati Thakura.

  • @mayurnavar247
    @mayurnavar247 3 роки тому +4

    Some Mayawadi's here in comment section are unable to tolerate this talk..
    All Glories to Srila Prabhupada 🙏 🙌

  • @TitoTorbellinoVevo
    @TitoTorbellinoVevo 5 років тому +10

    Srila Prabhupada doesn't ask that we combat Mayavadis with debates and certainly not with persecution but with harinam sankirtan and shastra. In other words it's not a matter of persecution but of sharing the Holy Names. In that we must tell the truth. So the fact that Mayavadis are asuras doesn't mean we have to beat them up or ban them, we fight them with a higher taste of love of Krsna. Besides many asuras in the Srimad Bhagavatam become great devotees once they leave their demonic perspectives behind.

    • @pranavm.d457
      @pranavm.d457 4 роки тому

      😂🤣😂😂

    • @soumyabratasahoo3649
      @soumyabratasahoo3649 3 роки тому

      @@pranavm.d457 I can't even fathom the stupidity of this video.
      Btw, Are you online??

    • @ashitmukherjee5934
      @ashitmukherjee5934 3 роки тому

      Very correct.💝

    • @lloydmckay3241
      @lloydmckay3241 2 роки тому

      Mayavadi ideas should be exposed when there is the opportunity. I am glad that this is so for my own sake as their idea is atheistic and has led to a decline in actual vedic culture. It is not pleasing to Krishna and when people take up such ideas they take up any thing and do no longer worship Krishna but do this thing and that thing without any restriction.

  • @jahnimai
    @jahnimai 10 років тому +5

    So very nice!

  • @ykd0011
    @ykd0011 2 місяці тому +2

    I have 12 different bhagvat gita books, 11 gita has same translations, only prabhu paad's gita has different translation because it is incorrect, all other gitas are correct.

  • @jagannathprasaddas7843
    @jagannathprasaddas7843 2 роки тому

    All glories to Srila Prabhupada 🙌🙌👏

  • @kri_Give
    @kri_Give 2 роки тому

    Hari boll

  • @krishnaisgod1
    @krishnaisgod1 11 років тому +5

    This conclusion is based on the Bhagvad Gita, and therefore correct, the question of tolerence does not arise

  • @shrutih19
    @shrutih19 2 роки тому +2

    Shri Krishn is my lord,my asset,my knowledge,my family and all...I follow Shankaracharya for keeping Hindu religion United for thousands of yrs...

  • @thegoldenage5943
    @thegoldenage5943 6 років тому +4

    Here krishna

  • @mayurnavar247
    @mayurnavar247 3 роки тому

    🙏🙏🙏

  • @ashitmukherjee5934
    @ashitmukherjee5934 3 роки тому +4

    Hare Krishna.Without reading Bhagvad Gita As It Is none will understand Krishna.Mayavadis find everything in Gita except accepting that Krishna is the supreme God even though Krishna says mattah partaram nanyat kinchidasti dhananjaya.So this is demonic to be a mayavadi and to not surrender to Krishna.💐

    • @निर्मितबत्रा
      @निर्मितबत्रा 2 роки тому +1

      I accept shri krishna as supreme but i believe in *vishith advait*

    • @ashitmukherjee5934
      @ashitmukherjee5934 2 роки тому +1

      @@निर्मितबत्रा Advaita, Vishishta Advaita,Dvaita, Advaita Dvaita are only the variously defined relationships between jivatma and parmatma seen by the seers.However, Sri Chaitanya said that qualitatively there is no difference but quantitatively jivatma is only a part or amsha of Supreme in potency.Krishna says, " maamaivaamsho jivaloke jivabhutah sanaatanah."But what is the form of God is beyond the thinking power of man.Therefore, Sri Chaitanya described this as 'achintyabhedabheda'.Hare Krishna.Jai Srila Prabhupada.🌹

    • @achyuthcn2555
      @achyuthcn2555 23 дні тому

      @@ashitmukherjee5934 , Shri Krishna has no form...Krishna is absolute reality called Brahman in Upaishads. Brahman is Infinite/Unlimited... If you think Krishna has form, then you are limiting the extent of Krishna.

    • @ashitmukherjee5934
      @ashitmukherjee5934 23 дні тому

      @achyuthcn2555 You are limiting Krishna as formless.

    • @achyuthcn2555
      @achyuthcn2555 23 дні тому +1

      @@ashitmukherjee5934 , He is formless and can take form for the purpose of Dharma sthaapana and blessing a devotee. But Ultimately Krishna is formless and qualityless(Nirguna and Niraakaara).

  • @jahnimai
    @jahnimai 8 років тому +3

    Simple Maha Bharata, history of Great Earth; don't be silly & sell yourself cheap. Just see sall is Krishna & post the adventure.

  • @deadster125
    @deadster125 5 місяців тому

    So anyone who is not under iscon is mayavadi
    Great

  • @deadster125
    @deadster125 5 місяців тому +1

    So brahmsakshatkar is all so
    Mayavadi mentioned in puranas and geetas, Upanishads are all mayavadi
    Congrats iscon
    You are against Sanatan dharm
    Oh you are not even hindu

  • @adityavashisth1683
    @adityavashisth1683 5 років тому +6

    Achintya Bheda Abheda is also a PHILOSOPHY,so it is also MAYAVADI.

    • @ayamatmabrahma9658
      @ayamatmabrahma9658 4 роки тому

      It’s not a philosophy it’s THE philosophy

    • @adityavashisth1683
      @adityavashisth1683 4 роки тому

      @@ayamatmabrahma9658 👍👍Hare Krishna 👍👍

    • @rajpanchal9226
      @rajpanchal9226 3 роки тому +1

      Mayavad is rejecting God and moreover trying to become God, Achintya Bheda Abheda reveals God- Krishna and shows to surrender to him.

    • @lloydmckay3241
      @lloydmckay3241 2 роки тому

      That's the worst so called logic that I have ever heard.

    • @adityavashisth1683
      @adityavashisth1683 2 роки тому

      @@lloydmckay3241 💐🤣😂😅😁😊💖 Thanks, for your compliment. 💖😊😁😅😂🤣💐

  • @universalmigrator
    @universalmigrator 11 років тому +13

    Krishna, is not even mentioned in the original Veda Samhitas, and Radha is not even mentioned in Srimad Bhagavatam, so that must mean all those sages that contributed to that literature must also be demons - wow, the Vedas didn't even mention Krishna, what Demons!
    This is ISKCON's main so called philosophical defence mechanism, when it can't win a battle it will immediately deem you a Mayavadi and Karmi, it's the only way they can escape a proper philosophical debate and tout false supremacy.

    • @ayushdeepankar6769
      @ayushdeepankar6769 5 років тому +1

      It is mentioned in Bhagwat purana and there is no need to mention Radha in Geeta

    • @pranavm.d457
      @pranavm.d457 4 роки тому

      @@ayushdeepankar6769 🤣😂🤣

    • @sanadmalhotra8250
      @sanadmalhotra8250 4 роки тому +3

      Read 10th canto of bhagvatam, it’s all about krishna and radha. secondly why sri radha would be there in geeta? It’s a dialogue between arjuna and sri krishna.

    • @aditshukla
      @aditshukla 4 роки тому

      @@pranavm.d457 😂😂😂yaha bhi ap😂

    • @lloydmckay3241
      @lloydmckay3241 2 роки тому

      Ah yes the envious demons speak like this always. That's you. No understanding nor even wanting to understand these higher things and therefore make offensive comments. No wonder the Vedic culture has declined by such mentalities of lower men.

  • @KikiManini
    @KikiManini 12 років тому +12

    "They do not accept Krsna as supreme, therefore, they are demons..."
    A very general example of religious intolerance demonstrated here.

    • @arunmozhi596
      @arunmozhi596 7 років тому +1

      So you do not want to know who the lord. Then tell me what is the source of everything

    • @07010431
      @07010431 7 років тому +2

      Arunmozhi Gnanavelu Vakhti to any name and form is good. If any organization demands that Krsna should be the only Lord and rest are all demigods than it is bound to be intolerant. Lord Caitanya says a Vaishnava should be tolerant like a tree. This quotes of Prabhupada are far from being tolerant.
      You asked about the source. The source can be any name and form: be it Vishnu, Shiva, Kali etc which Iskcon deems as Demigod. Or it can be formless Brahman, which Prabhupada deems as Mayabadi and demoniac.
      Very sad to watch such a abrahamic trend in Hindu practice. The sages of Rigvedas said: truth is one, sages call it differently. Whereas, according to Prabhupada, the truth is one and only I have the privileged access to the truth; the rest are either Demi or demons.

    • @amithnayak4965
      @amithnayak4965 7 років тому +8

      its not religious intolerance..it is to be understood that Krsna here means God in general..God is an english word which means the same as Allah..So its not that Krsna is different from God(Christian religion) or Allah(Islam)..all these refer to the exact same being..that sentence basically refers to a person who does not accept God as the supreme and claims he himself is God.

    • @ayamatmabrahma9658
      @ayamatmabrahma9658 4 роки тому +2

      If you can’t accept it then your heart is filled with envy typical of a demon.

    • @ashitmukherjee5934
      @ashitmukherjee5934 3 роки тому

      You are very right.💝

  • @KikiManini
    @KikiManini 11 років тому +3

    If religion doesn't teach you tolerance then it's not worth having. Clearly the "be as tolerant as a tree..." quote from Caitanya does not need to be taken seriously then.

    • @jesuschristsonofgod9709
      @jesuschristsonofgod9709 5 років тому

      Yes, lets all be tolerant of religions that advocate marrying underage children.

    • @ayushdeepankar6769
      @ayushdeepankar6769 5 років тому

      Ya and be tolerant about Buddha who was confused about existence of God

    • @sb2459
      @sb2459 4 роки тому

      @@ayushdeepankar6769 Some worship God and some raise their consciousness to become God. Not all the worshippers reach where Buddha did.

    • @rajpanchal9226
      @rajpanchal9226 3 роки тому

      @@sb2459 Buddha said there is no God and there is no soul so in buddhism there is no question of becoming anything as such
      Shrimad Bhagwatam 1.3.24
      TEXT 24
      tataḥ kalau sampravṛtte
      sammohāya sura-dviṣām
      buddho nāmnāñjana-sutaḥ
      kīkaṭeṣu bhaviṣyati
      SYNONYMS
      tataḥ-thereafter; kalau-the age of Kali; sampravṛtte-having ensued; sammohāya-for the purpose of deluding; sura-the theists; dviṣām-those who are envious; buddhaḥ-Lord Buddha; nāmnā-of the name; añjana-sutaḥ-the son of Añjana; kīkaṭeṣu-in the province of Gayā (Bihar); bhaviṣyati-will take place.
      TRANSLATION
      Then, in the beginning of Kali-yuga, the Lord will appear as Lord Buddha, the son of Añjana, in the province of Gayā, just for the purpose of deluding those who are envious of the faithful theist.
      PURPORT
      Lord Buddha, a powerful incarnation of the Personality of Godhead, appeared in the province of Gayā (Bihar) as the son of Añjana, and he preached his own conception of nonviolence and deprecated even the animal sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. At the time when Lord Buddha appeared, the people in general were atheistic and preferred animal flesh to anything else. On the plea of Vedic sacrifice, every place was practically turned into a slaughterhouse, and animal killing was indulged in unrestrictedly. Lord Buddha preached nonviolence, taking pity on the poor animals. He preached that he did not believe in the tenets of the Vedas and stressed the adverse psychological effects incurred by animal killing. Less intelligent men of the age of Kali, who had no faith in God, followed his principle, and for the time being they were trained in moral discipline and nonviolence, the preliminary steps for proceeding further on the path of God realization. He deluded the atheists because such atheists who followed his principles did not believe in God, but they kept their absolute faith in Lord Buddha, who himself was the incarnation of God. Thus the faithless people were made to believe in God in the form of Lord Buddha. That was the mercy of Lord Buddha: he made the faithless faithful to him.
      Killing of animals before the advent of Lord Buddha was the most prominent feature of the society. People claimed that these were Vedic sacrifices. When the Vedas are not accepted through the authoritative disciplic succession, the casual readers of the Vedas are misled by the flowery language of that system of knowledge. In the Bhagavad-gītā a comment has been made on such foolish scholars (avipaścitaḥ). The foolish scholars of Vedic literature who do not care to receive the transcendental message through the transcendental realized sources of disciplic succession are sure to be bewildered. To them, the ritualistic ceremonies are considered to be all in all. They have no depth of knowledge. According to the Bhagavad-gītā (15.15), vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ: the whole system of the Vedas is to lead one gradually to the path of the Supreme Lord. The whole theme of Vedic literature is to know the Supreme Lord, the individual soul, the cosmic situation and the relation between all these items. When the relation is known, the relative function begins, and as a result of such a function the ultimate goal of life or going back to Godhead takes place in the easiest manner. Unfortunately, unauthorized scholars of the Vedas become captivated by the purificatory ceremonies only, and natural progress is thereby checked.
      To such bewildered persons of atheistic propensity, Lord Buddha is the emblem of theism. He therefore first of all wanted to check the habit of animal killing. The animal killers are dangerous elements on the path going back to Godhead. There are two types of animal killers. The soul is also sometimes called the "animal" or the living being. Therefore, both the slaughterer of animals and those who have lost their identity of soul are animal killers.
      Mahārāja Parīkṣit said that only the animal killer cannot relish the transcendental message of the Supreme Lord. Therefore if people are to be educated to the path of Godhead, they must be taught first and foremost to stop the process of animal killing as above mentioned. It is nonsensical to say that animal killing has nothing to do with spiritual realization. By this dangerous theory many so-called sannyāsīs have sprung up by the grace of Kali-yuga who preach animal killing under the garb of the Vedas. The subject matter has already been discussed in the conversation between Lord Caitanya and Maulana Chand Kazi Shaheb. The animal sacrifice as stated in the Vedas is different from the unrestricted animal killing in the slaughterhouse. Because the asuras or the so-called scholars of Vedic literatures put forward the evidence of animal killing in the Vedas, Lord Buddha superficially denied the authority of the Vedas. This rejection of the Vedas by Lord Buddha was adopted in order to save people from the vice of animal killing as well as to save the poor animals from the slaughtering process of their big brothers who clamor for universal brotherhood, peace, justice and equity. There is no justice when there is animal killing. Lord Buddha wanted to stop it completely, and therefore his cult of ahiṁsā was propagated not only in India but also outside the country.
      Technically Lord Buddha's philosophy is called atheistic because there is no acceptance of the Supreme Lord and because that system of philosophy denied the authority of the Vedas. But that is an act of camouflage by the Lord. Lord Buddha is the incarnation of Godhead. As such, he is the original propounder of Vedic knowledge. He therefore cannot reject Vedic philosophy. But he rejected it outwardly because the sura-dviṣa, or the demons who are always envious of the devotees of Godhead, try to support cow killing or animal killing from the pages of the Vedas, and this is now being done by the modernized sannyāsīs. Lord Buddha had to reject the authority of the Vedas altogether. This is simply technical, and had it not been so he would not have been so accepted as the incarnation of Godhead. Nor would he have been worshiped in the transcendental songs of the poet Jayadeva, who is a Vaiṣṇava ācārya. Lord Buddha preached the preliminary principles of the Vedas in a manner suitable for the time being (and so also did Śaṅkarācārya) to establish the authority of the Vedas. Therefore both Lord Buddha and Ācārya Śaṅkara paved the path of theism, and Vaiṣṇava ācāryas, specifically Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, led the people on the path towards a realization of going back to Godhead.
      We are glad that people are taking interest in the nonviolent movement of Lord Buddha. But will they take the matter very seriously and close the animal slaughterhouses altogether? If not, there is no meaning to the ahiṁsā cult.
      Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam was composed just prior to the beginning of the age of Kali (about five thousand years ago), and Lord Buddha appeared about twenty-six hundred years ago. Therefore in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam Lord Buddha is foretold. Such is the authority of this clear scripture. There are many such prophecies, and they are being fulfilled one after another. They will indicate the positive standing of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, which is without trace of mistake, illusion, cheating and imperfection, which are the four flaws of all conditioned souls. The liberated souls are above these flaws; therefore they can see and foretell things which are to take place on distant future dates.

    • @lloydmckay3241
      @lloydmckay3241 2 роки тому

      That doesn't mean to accept any foolish nonsense though.