Tag: ISKCON

Bhaktivinoda Thakura was not staying in Godrumadvipa when he had his vision of the Adbhuta Mandira. In fact Bhaktivinoda's house at Godruma was not built until two years later.

What do heresy, the Inquisition, jihad and fatwa have in common with some Hare Krsnas?

A literal understanding of sastra, as it seems to be regarded in some sections of the greater Vaishnava community, is looked down upon as being neophyte or simply not intellectually satisfying. Some even consider the literal understanding of sastra to be the great enemy of progressive Krsna consciousness.

Numerous opinions abound about there being or not being an advent of Kalki-avatara at the end of Kali-yuga. Although Srimad Bhagavatam has mentioned the appearance of Kalki-avatara at the end of this Kali-yuga, some preachers are of the opinion that due to ‘the dawn of the age of love’ there will be no appearance of Kalki-avatara at the end of this Kali-yuga.

Recently an announcement was posted on "Dandavats.com" wherein the representative of ISKCON's Sri Sri Krishna Balaram temple in Vrindavana [Shyamakrishna Das] informed all the devotees around the world that "Srila Prabhupada's Bhajan-kutir is now re-opened."

I read a recent article on the internet by a leading ISKCON sannyasi/GBC/guru wherein he says, "We cannot even extend this family [ISKCON] to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta. We cannot even take one step forward because the problem is if we put too much emphasis on Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, then we will miss out on our focus. We will lose the focus on ISKCON." So my question is: Is there really a conflict between the interests [focus] of ISKCON and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta?

During my many travels in India I have visited certain temples where it is claimed that the Deity of Visnu or Krishna was self-manifest. So my question is, whether it is possible that God self-manifests His Deity form or is it always necessary that an acarya or representative of God be instrumental in establishing a Deity?

I have heard it said recently by some devotees that the origin of the jiva (regarding the soul's falling or not falling from the lila of Krsna) is inconceivable and that we cannot imagine or understand how or from where the soul has come into this material world. Can you please comment on this controversial topic?

I have read the book "Our Original Position" (OOP) published by the Iskcon GBC Press in which it is stated that the jivas (living entities) come to this material world after falling from grace in the spiritual world. Is this 'fall philosophy' correct according to sastra and previous acaryas?

There is a doubt circulating among some devotees about the authentic location of 'Mayapura,' the birth site of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. There is also a controversy among some devotees about the Adbhuta-mandira. Will you please say something to clarify these issues?

I have heard whispers that the temple being built in Mayapura, called the "Temple of Understanding," in some ways falls short of the proper conception of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. I have also heard that this Temple of Understanding is thought by some devotees to be the Adbhuta Mandira predicted by Sri Nityananda Prabhu and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. In your opinion is there any truth to this way of thinking?

Some time ago, a sannyasi who could not maintain his vows of renunciation wrote an apologetic letter on the internet addressed to his disciples and friends wherein he explained the numerous reasons why he could not continue in the renounced order of life. In order to excuse his weakness, the apologetic sannyasi quoted a verse from the Brahma-vaivarta Purana to substantiate his opinion that Sannyasa is not meant for the people of Kali-Yuga.