Navakishora Mukunda at 08:54, 22 October 2024

2024-10-22T08:54:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:54, 22 October 2024
Line 10:		Line 10:
	{{total\|5}}		{{total\|5}}
	{{toc right}}		{{toc right}}
	[[Category:~~Become~~ God\|1]]		[[Category:Becoming God\|1]]
	[[Category:Compilations from Letters]]		[[Category:Compilations from Letters]]
	</div>		</div>

Labangalatika: Created page with '

{{terms|"became god"|"become god"|"becomes god"|"becoming god"}} {{notes|Does not include "become God conscious"}} {{compiler|Labangalatik…'

2011-05-26T18:32:10Z

Created page with '<div id="compilation"> <div id="facts"> {{terms|"became god"|"become god"|"becomes god"|"becoming god"}} {{notes|Does not include "become God conscious"}} {{compiler|Labangalatik…'

New page

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"became god"|"become god"|"becomes god"|"becoming god"}}
{{notes|Does not include "become God conscious"}}
{{compiler|Labangalatika}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|26May11}}
{{last|26May11}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=0|Let=5}}
{{total|5}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Become God|1]]
[[Category:Compilations from Letters]]
</div>
<div id="Correspondence" class="section" sec_index="6" parent="compilation" text="Correspondence"><h2>Correspondence</h2>
</div>
<div id="1968_Correspondence" class="sub_section" sec_index="3" parent="Correspondence" text="1968 Correspondence"><h3>1968 Correspondence</h3>
</div>
<div id="LettertoJayagovindaLosAngeles8February1968_0" class="quote" parent="1968_Correspondence" book="Let" index="49" link="Letter to Jayagovinda -- Los Angeles 8 February, 1968" link_text="Letter to Jayagovinda -- Los Angeles 8 February, 1968">
<div class="heading">Lord Caitanya's philosophy is not to become God, but to become servant, servant, servant of God. The more one becomes the lower grade servant of the Lord, the more he is devoted nearer to the Lord.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Jayagovinda -- Los Angeles 8 February, 1968|Letter to Jayagovinda -- Los Angeles 8 February, 1968]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Your attitude of humbleness is praiseworthy. A devotee should always remain humble and meek especially to the authorities and devotees. Lord Caitanya's philosophy is not to become God, but to become servant, servant, servant of God. The more one becomes the lower grade servant of the Lord, the more he is devoted nearer to the Lord. This is our philosophy. I have all my hearty blessings upon you, please do your duties nicely, and Krishna will be pleased to shower His Blessings upon you. He is very kind to sincere souls, and He gives intelligence from within to sincere devotees. We require only to become sincere in the service of the Lord, then everything is there ready for our convenience.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LettertoMahapurusaLosAngeles12February1968_1" class="quote" parent="1968_Correspondence" book="Let" index="52" link="Letter to Mahapurusa -- Los Angeles 12 February, 1968" link_text="Letter to Mahapurusa -- Los Angeles 12 February, 1968">
<div class="heading">We are following the footprints of Lord Caitanya. We are not going to become God, as Maharishi says every one of us is God. You should be firmly convinced in your own philosophy, Bhagavad-gita, otherwise you may be misled.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Mahapurusa -- Los Angeles 12 February, 1968|Letter to Mahapurusa -- Los Angeles 12 February, 1968]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Do not bother your head about that rascal Maharishi Mahesa. His activities are like the waves tossing foam on the ocean. It will stay for some time and then vanquish. For the time the ocean appears to be all devouring, but in proper time it is calm and quiet. Krishna Consciousness isn't like that. It is a great science. It requires great spiritual asset to adopt the principles. You have desired to meet with Maharishi Mahesa for argument, and as Lord Caitanya argued with Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya. Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya was talking on the basic principle of Vedanta. So there was a via media interpretation. This man does not follow any Sastra or any authority. He is authority by himself, and has manufactured his own meditation process. Therefore, he is not standard. We cannot waste our time with a non-standard loafer class man. Therefore do not agitate your mind in this way. We are following the footprints of Lord Caitanya. We are not going to become God, as Maharishi says every one of us is God. You should be firmly convinced in your own philosophy, Bhagavad-gita, otherwise you may be misled. Why don't you try to convince the followers of Maharishi that they are following a rascal, a cheat. Because he does not follow a standard process. So try to understand the followers of Maharishi, how far they have advanced in spiritual consciousness, and get it corroborated from the teaching of Bhagavad-gita as you learned. Lord Caitanya talked with Sarvabhauma on the basis of Vedanta Sutra. The Maharishi has no basic principle, he is manufacturing his own way. So it is useless to talk with him. He has gathered the not very intelligent class of men, and they will not stay. We are teaching Bhagavad-gita as it is, that is called Krishna Consciousness. Why don't you try to understand Maharishi from the point of view of Bhagavad-gita.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="LettertoKrisLosAngeles13November1968_2" class="quote" parent="1968_Correspondence" book="Let" index="414" link="Letter to Kris -- Los Angeles 13 November, 1968" link_text="Letter to Kris -- Los Angeles 13 November, 1968">
<div class="heading">And here and there, there were signs of all sorts, like "Be still and realize I am God"—what is this, by becoming silent and still one becomes God?! The stone is silent for millions of years, does that mean it has become God?
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Kris -- Los Angeles 13 November, 1968|Letter to Kris -- Los Angeles 13 November, 1968]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Regarding your question about Yogananda, you write to say that you "received the impression from his autobiography that he was a genuine saint who dedicated his life to serving God." But the thing is that you do not actually know what is a genuine saint, and what can you understand about saintly life from reading his autobiography. I may inform you that just recently I visited his so-called asrama retreat, and it was simply a hodge-podge of all nonsense. There was a Buddha statue, a Christ statue, a Gandhi's memorium labeled as "World Peace Memorium"—and what world peace he has brought? None. And what does Gandhi have to do with spiritual realization anyway? Gandhi was simply interested to get the Britishers out of India—what has this to do with self-realization, the prime goal of life? And here and there, there were signs of all sorts, like "Be still and realize I am God"—what is this, by becoming silent and still one becomes God?! The stone is silent for millions of years, does that mean it has become God? This is all conglomeration of nonsense ideas. Practically, this Yogananda has no philosophy or authority, he simply drags in Buddha, Jesus Christ, Gandhi, and whoever else he can think to put, so that whatever you like it is in his shop. He is just a good shop keeper.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1969_Correspondence" class="sub_section" sec_index="4" parent="Correspondence" text="1969 Correspondence"><h3>1969 Correspondence</h3>
</div>
<div id="LettertoMukundaHamburg1October1969_0" class="quote" parent="1969_Correspondence" book="Let" index="594" link="Letter to Mukunda -- Hamburg 1 October, 1969" link_text="Letter to Mukunda -- Hamburg 1 October, 1969">
<div class="heading">We worship all worthy sons and servants of God, but we kick on the face of all rascals who claim to have become God so cheaply to mislead many innocent persons.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Mukunda -- Hamburg 1 October, 1969|Letter to Mukunda -- Hamburg 1 October, 1969]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">If Mr. Lennon contributes his place as described by you, then we shall turn it into a place of Divine Culture which the younger generation needs so badly. And if the Archbishop of Canterbury gives us one, two, three, four, up to the point of all the redundant churches, I shall turn them all into great places of worship of all kinds of men. If so desired, we can worship the picture of Lord Jesus Christ who we admit as the son of Godhead. We worship all worthy sons and servants of God, but we kick on the face of all rascals who claim to have become God so cheaply to mislead many innocent persons.</p>
</div>
</div>
<div id="1976_Correspondence" class="sub_section" sec_index="11" parent="Correspondence" text="1976 Correspondence"><h3>1976 Correspondence</h3>
</div>
<div id="LettertoMrDhawanVrindaban2April1976_0" class="quote" parent="1976_Correspondence" book="Let" index="214" link="Letter to Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976" link_text="Letter to Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976">
<div class="heading">At the present moment it has become a fashion to become God very cheaply, therefore, such system being very cheap and not authorized, there are so many religious systems. Otherwise, God is one, all living entities are His eternal servants, and therefore, the real religious system is to learn how to serve God.
</div>
<span class="link">[[Vanisource:Letter to Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976|Letter to Mr. Dhawan -- Vrindaban 2 April, 1976]]: </span><div style="display: inline;" class="text"><p style="display: inline;">Question #4: why all the present religions and spiritual systems came into existence, contradicting each other when humanity is meant to follow only one religion?</p>
<p>Answer: Religious system means the law given by God. In every system of religion the order is to follow the instruction given by God or His representative. Unfortunately, the so-called followers deviate from the orders of the master and sometimes create their own concocted religious system. Otherwise, there can't be different religions. We therefore accept only one religion which teaches one how to love God. Any religious system which doesn't teach this, how to love God is not religion, but is cheating system. The conditioned souls who have come to this world on account of forgetfulness of his eternal relationship with God is prone to be cheated, but a person who is sincere is not cheated, but he takes up the path which leads one to the perfection of life, how to love God. The present religious and spiritual systems in varieties come into existence on account of imperfect leaders who defied the authority of God. My suggestion is therefore that the leaders who actually agree as eternal servant of God may sit together and find out the ways and means of one religious system in this world. God is one. There cannot be many gods, otherwise there is no meaning of God. In the English dictionary, you find that God means the "Supreme Being." There are unlimited number of living beings, but God is one Supreme Being. Supreme Being must be one. Nobody can be equal to Him, and nobody can be greater than Him, otherwise there is no meaning of God. At the present moment it has become a fashion to become God very cheaply, therefore, such system being very cheap and not authorized, there are so many religious systems. Otherwise, God is one, all living entities are His eternal servants, and therefore, the real religious system is to learn how to serve God.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Become God (Letters) - Revision history

Navakishora Mukunda at 08:54, 22 October 2024

Labangalatika: Created page with ' {{terms|"became god"|"become god"|"becomes god"|"becoming god"}} {{notes|Does not include "become God conscious"}} {{compiler|Labangalatik…'

Labangalatika: Created page with '

{{terms|"became god"|"become god"|"becomes god"|"becoming god"}} {{notes|Does not include "become God conscious"}} {{compiler|Labangalatik…'