is that really your religion now? If so, I'm curious to know how that came about if you're willing to share. If you already shared this then I'm sorry, I must have missed it. Just curious though.

According to the Book of Krishna, the Krishnites traveled high over the ocean in sealed metal tubes. They settled in airports in the seventies. There they proselytized and harassed airline travelers. Mobs chased them out of the eastern airports, and the Krishnites fled to the west. They tried to hold out in Texas and southern Utah, but their tambourines and castanets annoyed the locals. People mocked their bald heads and short-sheeted their linen robes. No longer do airline patrons hear the cry of, "Hairy Krishmas, Hairy Ramadan!"

lol I worked for the airlines for 10 years so I have a testimony that what you say is twoo

Oh dear. I should probably find this offensive, but I had to laugh. :-) A lot of silly stereotypes and jokes about the Hare Krishnas have come out of the airport days as well as the street chanting / street book distribution days.

Now, about my REAL story ;-) I will write more. Later.

Krishna means "all beautiful". Most humans cannot comprehend "eternity", fathom bliss or harnesses "other" because they do not know their own power (comprehension) and spend most of their time focusing on satisfying the body, concentrating on physical matter and achievement, rather than the nothingness that exists when they forget themselves. Mormonism puts a wedge between family, knowledge and sainthood.Hare Krishna

Growing up Mormon I always put a lot of emphasis on the spiritual. I tried to do what was "right" always. I never cared much for the physical. (My hygiene was poor and I never exercised).

Since Ive given up on many spiritual aspects of life Ive noticed many changes. Two of which stick out very much.

I obsessively brush my teeth and use mouthwash.
I exercise every day.

These might seem like two random things. But I have also noticed a big change in my eating habits.

My point is, I actually care about my physical self for the first time. Because now I see the importance of the here and now and am not blinded by a false idea of "eternity"

And it is SO MUCH more satisfying than the spiritual side ever was.

Mormonism puts a weird spin on things. To me, it's like throwing the baby out with the bath water when after dealing with a religion, you decide nothing is true or could possibly be. That's what I value about eastern religions. They are always talking about balance.

That is *partly* right.

my post wasn't a setup to mock Hare Krishna btw, I respect a lot of their views actually. I was just interested in knowing how that particular poster went from Mormonism to hare Krishna. One of my friends named her daughter Krishna and I thought that was beautiful.

Tupperwhere Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> my post wasn't a setup to mock Hare Krishna btw, I
> respect a lot of their views actually. I was just
> interested in knowing how that particular poster
> went from Mormonism to hare Krishna. One of my
> friends named her daughter Krishna and I thought
> that was beautiful.
Amen... and a lot of women

I appreciate your interest and I will write more. :-)

Krishna is a name for God in the Hare Krishna, and also in Vaishnava sects of the Hindu, faiths, and incidentally, one definition of Krishna in the Sanskrit language does indeed mean 'all-attractive' or 'all-beautiful'. I do agree that it is a beautiful name.

International Society for Krishna Consciousness is as controversial as Mormonism if not more so.

Here is a blog of an ex-member: http://harekrishnacultexposed.blogspot.com/

Here is an older article on one of their splinter groups:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/cult/hare_krishna/main.htm



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2014 01:02PM by archytas.

Speaking as someone who actually believes and follows the faith - Ekayani's blog (the first link) is a horrible misrepresentation of it in many ways. There has also been no evidence for a number of her claims against certain specific members of the faith.

The second link refers to a community that was long excommunicated from ISKCON and only very recently (AFTER a change in leadership and a significant change in their beliefs and practices) was welcomed back into ISKCON and now accepts the Hare Krishna faith as taught by ISKCON. At the time of its excommunication it may have been considered a Hare Krishna group by belief but it certainly had no connection with ISKCON.

And its involvement in what many have classified as cult-like practices is certainly regrettable. :-(

(involvement at the time of excommunication)

I realize it's a splinter group, but at RFM we point to the FLDS as one of the "fruits" of JS.

I think it is fair to point to ISKON splinter groups in the same way.

Wow, I didn't expect nearly this much attention to a thread related to me. Tupperwhere, I don't believe I've posted my story here on RfM yet. I'd certainly be happy to share.

I do need to be AFK (away from keyboard) at the moment. I will be back. :-)

**related to me or my faith, I meant.

Okay, so here's my story. :-) PART 1 -

My parents are not Mormons. They claimed to be people of a specific faith, but in reality my father was practically a Deist (not entirely) and my mother also was not too religious. My family belonged to a small and little known religious sect - and within that sect, my family members formed and joined a small group with some very specific beliefs (not all religious). I hesitate to use the word "cult" as it has far too often been widely misused, but truthfully select behaviours and mindsets of certain individuals within this group did seem to be quite reflective of what I would imagine to be those of a "cult" (in the negative sense).

I also noticed unethical behaviours practised by select members of this group. I learnt that this could not be blamed on the faith itself, but on the very human flaws of misguided people who did not truly follow its teachings. That taught me early on to separate "bad believers" from "bad organization" or "bad faith", and to keep an open mind even to faiths with believers who have acted badly, knowing that their actions do not necessarily represent their faith. But it was nevertheless quite dissatisfying to see it happen in (then) my own faith. Believers of this particular sect believe that they are the chosen ones of God (as this sect usually does NOT take converts, you have to be really fortunate and well-deserving to be born into it in their view) but I could very clearly see through this ideology and frankly I resented it.

I believed in God even as a child, and had some religious interest, but I did not grow up to be particularly religious. I developed a stronger interest in religion from around the start of secondary school, and that is when I began really critically examining my beliefs. To make a long story short, this critical examination led to the discovery of irreconcilable flaws of the little-known faith tradition that I was raised in and I simply could not accept it any longer. The above was one, but most definitely not the only, belief that I rejected of this faith. That forced me to start my spiritual journey of exploration into others' beliefs.

I was fortunately the type of student who would effortlessly get good grades in school with very little study. And my parents, for completely non-religious reasons (they were simply major control freaks), had placed a number of heavy restrictions on me while living with them, essentially forbidding most opportunities to meet with friends, go anywhere without my parents, or do almost any activities not related to school, with few exceptions. That left me with plenty of free time on my hands (how I miss that free time!) to spend on reading, and researching, different faith traditions and different beliefs.

My encounter with Mormonism came during this time. Before my serious exploration of other faiths began, I first discovered Mormonism through a Mormon classmate/friend. I had initially assumed it was simply another sect of Protestant Christianity, before hearing about it. I quickly learned that this was not the case, but still I was intrigued. Further fuelling my interest in Mormonism was that I actually had very positive experiences with the few Mormons in my life, and I was genuinely impressed with them.

My classmate/friend handed me a Book of Mormon and a pamphlet (intended for Christians, who already believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour - something which I had not yet committed myself to, at this point) explaining who is Joseph Smith and describing the First Vision. As I did not fully accept the premise of the pamphlet at the time, the point it was trying to make (that Joseph Smith is a Prophet, and that the Book of Mormon is truly another testament of Jesus Christ) did not have much meaning to me at the time. But I still accepted the book and the pamphlet - knowing him to have had good intentions - and shelved them away.

It was some time later, after my spiritual exploration really started to pick up steam, that I revisited Mormonism with more serious interest. To make a long story short here, I began making more serious inquiries into the faith and doing more research on it. Certain aspects seemed interesting, but others did concern me. The lifestyle did not much bother me, but the history really did. I spent a fair amount of time "investigating" but eventually I decided that I would not stay with the Mormon faith. I did not have a bad experience with anyone in the Mormon church and I still have tremendous respect for the Mormons that I know.

I was not told many things about the Mormon faith by those who introduced me to it. I don't hold that against them necessarily. Perhaps they believed that I was not spiritually ready to handle what they believe, that it might be inappropriate (or even forbidden) to teach me these beliefs early on in my exploration, or that the knowledge would come to me at the appropriate time in my life, and as one who now believes that greater spiritual knowledge does come with spiritual growth and development, I can understand that. Or maybe they simply did not want me to scare me away, and lose their chance to "save" my soul.

That said, it would be very nice to have a more complete understanding of the faith one accepts before expecting them to convert. A period of deeper study, as is expected or required in many faiths (including my own - the Hare Krishna faith) prior to baptism or initiation, would be quite help to ensure that one really knows what they will believe and what they are getting into BEFORE they finally accept the faith. In any case, the Internet has been a fantastic resource in teaching me many things about this and other faiths.

[End of Part 1 - Part 2 Coming Soon]

The story continues :-) PART 2 -

I explored, to varying degrees, various other other faiths - including: various sects of mainstream Christianity (Catholic and Protestant), Islam, Judaism (Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform), various sects of Hinduism, select sects of Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Wicca, and the Baha'i Faith. Of these, I was initially most familiar with Hinduism - having family from India who actively practised the faith - but eventually I learnt a great deal from my research and personal study about other faiths. Some of these, I examined with serious interest, while others, I explored just with some curiosity. At this point, I was aware of, but did not look seriously into, and was most definitely not seriously considering, the Hare Krishna faith.

To make a very, very long story short, while there were certain aspects of these faiths that I found interesting, for many of these faiths/sects I eventually ran into concerns about beliefs that prevented me from fully accepting them. But there was one faith/sect that I kept coming back to, for a variety of reasons - including what I saw as a rather logical world view that fit in nicely with scientific teachings (and that embraced science rather than fighting against it), teachings that answered questions and filled in philosophical gaps/holes that I found in other faiths, historical evidences that seemed to confirm certain stories accepted by this faith, and scriptures with confirmed ancient dating that had an astounding accuracy at making certain future predictions as well as in explaining accurately in detail certain things (such as the development of the child in the womb in stages) that early believers would have no way of knowing about without the modern advances of science and technology that we now have available to us, along with certain personal experiences that I had in this faith/sect. That faith/sect was Vaishnava Hinduism.

But my spiritual journey did not end there, and that is because I discovered a rather interesting - and to me, as a truth-seeker, rather concerning - fact about Hinduism.

Hinduism as a whole, as it stands now, is a giant, huge mess. There is a fairly wide diversity of theologies and philosophies even within what would be considered as "mainstream" Hinduism, with heterodox beliefs spanning an even wider diversity of beliefs. There are some shared basic principles, such as a belief in one God, and the doctrines of karma (basically, you earn your future, based on your actions in the past and present) and reincarnation until salvation - both of which are meant to be teaching tools, to gradually enable us to learn to choose the right and to become, with time, worthy of salvation - which practically all Hindus accept. But even such basic doctrines as exactly Who is believed to be that one God, what is actually meant by salvation, and the nature of the spirit soul as well as its relationship with God - despite scriptures being unequivocally clear in what they say about such matters - can differ widely amongst sects of the faith. Even the followers of Hinduism themselves, in practice, might not completely understand what they believe or how to explain their beliefs, and there is a lot of confusion within as well as outside of the faith about it. Consequently there is a lot of misinformation - some produced by outsiders, others made by even people within the faith - about what the Vedic scriptures actually teach.

There are a number of reasons for why this is the case, but ultimately the main reason boils down to either not reading, or not properly understanding, what is written in the Vedic scriptures. That is caused by a variety of factors, including socio-cultural reasons, perceptions that simply learning whatever gurus (spiritual teachers) teach is sufficient (and there are gurus/spiritual teachers of Hinduism who say all kinds of things!), and limited access to the scriptures for the masses (a terrible mistake) for a great number of years. The unfortunate consequence is that people did not really know what they believed, and came up with a bunch of different ideas to fill in the gaps in their knowledge - and then, when greater access to the scriptures DID finally come around, they did quite a bit of "interpretation" to keep faith in their beliefs.

It might help to explain one of the major differences in what Hindus actually believe, to illustrate my point.

There are two main philosophical schools of Hinduism: personalism and impersonalism. Personalists believe in a personal God. They accept the existence of an impersonal form of God, but they believe that God is ultimately and originally personal. They also believe that the world is real, although experiences within it may be temporary, and that individual spirit souls (we) are never one with God but are eternally His devotees. Illusion arises from our separation from God, and disappears by our truly reconnecting with Him. Impersonalists, on the other hand, believe that God is ultimately impersonal. Pure impersonalism also teaches that the world is not real but an illusion, and that all spirit souls (we) are actually God, but because WE are in illusion (don't ask me how it's possible for an all-powerful, all-knowing God to be in illusion - as I don't know and I don't believe in it) we don't know it, and we will learn it when we get out of illusion. Impersonalism is intrinsically linked to early Indian Buddhist beliefs. Impersonalism, incidentally, has also been a heavy early influence to a great number of Western religious movements.

Impersonalist ideals have, for a variety of reasons, been gaining popularity in India as well as in the West. The trouble is, impersonalism is NOT what the Vedic scriptures actually teach. So they have to twist around the words of the scriptures (in what the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, Srila Prabhupada, likes to call "word jugglery"), devise their own interpretations, dismiss what is written as merely "figurative", or discard the scriptures entirely, to come up with a method of reasoning to justify their beliefs. The same is true of theological schools - Vaishnavism, or belief that Vishnu or Krishna (same personality, different names/forms) is God, with other divine personalities in Hindu theology (called devas/devis, also translated as demigods) being devotees and servants of the Lord, is clearly evidenced by the writings of scripture, but those of other theological sects in Hinduism have similarly come up with ways to rationalize their respective beliefs.

As an example: there is a scripture verse in which the Lord (Krishna) tells His devotee, who had been confused about what to do in his life and who didn't feel capable of taking up other forms of spiritual practice, to simply "Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me." As Krishna is the speaker, it's pretty clear that He is telling His devotee to surrender unto Him. But a number of impersonalists have twisted this verse around to claim that by "unto Me", Krishna is not actually referring to Himself, but to the Lord within the heart - and from the impersonalist point of view, since we are all really actually God, we learn to accept this, and we should surrender unto OURSELVES, instead of to Him. Absolutely crazy in my opinion, but this is actually how this verse is translated in a number of impersonalist renditions of scriptures - including the Bhagavad Gita, one of the most widely translated books. It's hugely important to have a good translation when you engage in serious study of the Bhagavad Gita (and other scriptures).

So, I could see the problem very clearly, I understood the differences between the different major philosophical and theological sects of Hinduism, and I knew why they came about. But that alone didn't help me, as a truth-seeker, to understand WHICH faith tradition was right to follow - that is, which beliefs the Vedic scriptures actually teaches. To find that out, I had to engage in much deeper study, correct past mistaken beliefs, and take a leap of faith that would eventually lead me to my current spiritual path - and to also help me to understand why myself and others take the spiritual paths in which they choose to believe.

[End of Part 2 - Part 3 Coming Soon]

And the story still continues :-) PART 3 -

At this point, I knew enough about the Vedic scriptures (because it is very clear, when taking the words of scripture as-it-is) to understand that they are teaching a Vaishnava (theologically), personalist (philosophically) world view of what is now known as Hinduism. But I still didn't quite know in which direction to go, or to which faith tradition to turn, because even within a particular theological or philosophical division of Hinduism, there is substantial diversity in beliefs. I was looking for answers, also, and although I saw some definite answers in general Hindu belief, I didn't really see how it all fit together just yet - with differences in specific beliefs contributing to that confusion - and I still had some unanswered questions.

I didn't really know all that much about the Hare Krishnas at that time, but I had mixed feelings about them. I knew that they were Vaishnavas of some sort by belief and practice, but there were certain things they did that at the time I thought were strange. They were definitely far more eager and willing to share their beliefs than many Hindus (some of whom actually BAN those not born as Hindus from their temples, or at least realy look down on them - something that I think is very wrong) - and while I saw that as a good thing, that also struck me as strange. I also didn't really understand many of their unique beliefs.

I didn't really see them as a "cult" per se. But I did think - without actually knowing what they believed - that perhaps they were a New Agey hippie group that perhaps adopted some principles or practices of Hinduism, but which wasn't staying true to the beliefs of Hinduism and Westernized it with their own additions. Thinking it to be a new religious movement with some of its own made-up beliefs (how wrong I was!) I believed that the absolute truth would not be found in the faith in its purest form, and I didn't even bother to look.

That all changed dramatically when - by chance - I happened to actually meet members of the Hare Krishna faith, and to learn what they actually believed. I had some really nice discussions with the first Hare Krishna devotee that I met on the subject of religion. I had a lot more respect for them when I saw that not only were they taking up actual beliefs and practices of the Hindu faith, but that they were doing so far more seriously than the average Hindu ever was. But I still was skeptical about them at first.

I had up to this point done a somewhat limited exploration on the scriptures, relying mainly on respected translations and commentaries, combined with a limited knowledge of the Sanskrit language that I had to interpret key verses correctly. I didn't really feel confident at first to really dive deeper into the original text of the scriptures myself, to really see what they said.

But my discussions with these Hare Krishna devotees - people who were far more confident about their faith than I was - made me realise that if I really wanted to find and accept my beliefs, I had to start delving deeper into what the scriptural texts actually said. If I want to wholeheartedly accept these scriptures, I need to really know what they say and see if this is what I can believe in. Realising that these devotees - who had already been doing so - retained their faith despite their deep exploration, I decided to keep an open mind about their faith, even if for the time being I didn't agree with it. Armed with my Sanskrit language resources in-hand - key amongst them, the world-revered Monier-Williams Sanskrit dictionary - I began my deeper study, of the scriptures as well as of the faith itself. And so I learnt a lot about this faith.

It turns out that this Hare Krishna movement teachings are actually derived from the Gaudiya Vaishnava spiritual tradition of ancient India - a Vaishnava denomination of the Hindu faith. It wasn't a crazy Eastern inspired cult or some Western interpolation of Hinduism - it was a real traditional faith, widely considered by academia to be a branch of Vaishnava Hinduism, that was really practised in India. More specifically, the faith originated in West Bengal, and had prior to the worldwide spread of the Hare Krishna movement had primarily been practiced there and in what is now called Odisha (Orissa), and was also practised elsewhere in India. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), the world's largest Hare Krishna organization, was started in the 1960's, but the faith well predates ISKCON, and there are a number of groups and independent believers who have no affiliation to ISKCON but who practice the Hare Krishna faith. (There may be slight differences between the views of different Hare Krishna groups, but the essential beliefs are largely the same.)

A lot of things about the Hare Krishnas that most Westerners think are strange are actually common to traditional Hinduism and quite normal in India. The unique dress - which is not actually required of the faith, but which many devotees like to wear, as a sort of common uniform or a characteristic dress that identifies its wearers as Hare Krishna devotees - is actually native to India, and commonly worn by people there, with the saffron-orange colour traditionally worn by those who, at present, have committed themselves to celibate life, and usually, full-time devotional service. Many of the hymns and chants sung are taken directly from the scriptures, and many spiritual practices are common to Hinduism as well.

Hare Krishna devotees do tend to take them far more seriously, and accept them more wholeheartedly, than the average Hindu, and they also tend to stay very true to the teachings of scripture as-it-is, whereas Hindus tend to take things more liberally and feel free to come up with their own interpretations of things. But the teachings and practices of the Hare Krishna faith are all there, to some degree, in Hinduism itself.

All of this was a huge surprise to me. And when I began to actually, seriously consider the scriptures, and started reading a key (and relatively long) scripture from cover to cover, with analysis of the text in its original language (Sanskrit), I got an even bigger surprise - that the Hare Krishna devotees actually seemed to do a pretty good job of getting right what is actually taught in the Vedic scriptures. They were staying more true to it, it seemed, then many Hindus!

And my scripture study also brought me to an important point in my spiritual life. So many of the unanswered questions that I had, gradually, began to be answered, and so much of the confusion that I initially had began to clear up. So many of the things that I learned really started to fit together and make sense. I finally had many of the answers that I was looking for!

The Hare Krishna faith, and also the Vedic scriptures, teach that the guru (spiritual teacher), the sadhus ("saints", or more generally, good believers who actually follow the teachings of a faith), and the sastra (scriptures) should all be checked against each other, to evaluate if the teachings of one are truly validated by the teachings of the others. These, along with logic, intelligence, service, and one's own personal experience, may be used to evaluate the potential validity of a faith as well as whether it is right for you. With all of these, while initially I was resistant, eventually I could not run away, and I realised that the Hare Krishna faith appears to be the truest path and the best path for me. I finally joined the Hare Krishna faith. :-)

[End of Part 3]

The class was called something like "Current Religious Movements in the US and World."

One field trip was at the Hare Krishna Temple a few blocks from the campus.

We ate slimy piles of different kinds of glob using bean chips for spoons while sitting in a circle on a very dusty floor. We listened to a lecture from someone with dirty feet and then we stood up and chanted. Some of the believers went into trances similar to holy rollers. The place had a strong odor of incense and flowers.

I considered these people to be fanatical and they seemed to have parts of their brains cordoned off. It was interesting but not the least bit enlightening or inspiring. Just another group of religious zealots in my opinion.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2014 08:35AM by Cheryl.

I'm sorry you had such a bad experience. :-( It sounds like there were a few things (although it's pretty hard to judge especially when knowing so little about the situation) that shouldn't have happened or that at the very least were out of place or weren't handled very well.

I'll be honest - I might have thought it was pretty weird if that was my first experience of the faith as well. Especially as I had a lot of strange ideas about the faith before I actually learned what it was really about.

One thing I should clarify quickly though is that the Hare Krishnas aren't all one single faith group. There are actually many Hare Krishna groups which share many, or all, tenets of the Hare Krishna faith. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) is the largest, perhaps the most famous, and one of the earliest

Some people of the Hare Krishna faith do believe that we should try to go into ecstatic trances quickly - something that to me didn't seem quite right. The traditional view and what is taught in ISKCON that while there is a genuine spiritual joy experienced in reconnecting with God, that would come naturally as we grow in our faith, and we definitely should not try to imitate it, force it, or fake it with so-called "ecstatic trances".

Sorry, I didn't quite finish my sentence before I hit "Post message" - ISKCON is one of the earliest to really gain attention and a large following worldwide, especially within India as well as within the Western world. But the Hare Krishna faith is far older than ISKCON, and there are many people - before and after ISKCON began - who are members of Hare Krishna faith groups, or of no particular faith group, which accept the beliefs and tenets and follow the practices of the Hare Krishna faith. I am myself a member of ISKCON.

I thought the experience was interesting and positive. I learned the chanting and still remember all of it. I got to see it in action and meet about 12 or 15 of the members. They meant well and that's all anyone can ask.

I know more than I need to about the religion and I now have little to no interest in learning more.

So many religious people assume others would love it too if it were presented in a better light with more extensive explanations. That's usually a false assumption.

I took a similar class in college and had a good experience visiting the Denver Hare Krishna temple many years ago. The meal that we had there was delicious, but our instructor later told us that they tend to eat more plainly on a daily basis. The temple was clean, nicely decorated, and attractive. The Hare Krishnas seemed normal and easy to talk to. The group is not for me, but they seemed far less culty than I had thought back in the airport/street solicitation days.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2014 01:05PM by summer.

Always did like the hare krishnas...still do. But I could never give up meat.

If Mormonism (and Mormons) taught, and really believed, that life is a deep and mysterious study, and that the way back to Godhead is through a specific practice, they may join their own movement.

However, they no more hold the keys to the kingdom of God than even understand what they believe, preach and say they know...
[than Otis to his cell on Andy Griffith. And if they do, they can't easily find their way out. Circular reasoning... like Otis, always going back to jail, drunk on their own following their tail].

One is naturally attracted to Krishna/ God, if even they can comprehend the all encompassing "nature of life". God has many names and is infused into each particle, dimension and think. How one finds their way (to believe and understand and live up to this "truth") is up to them and how one practices is a highly stylized and personal thing.

One could benefit from practicing, and studying their own religion. Therefore, since Mormonism has no basis, (I know, JS, BoM, blah, blah, blah) it can't be considered a religion, and since most of it can be disproved, [or not proven], there is no real way to follow it, even by it's "leaders".

If you go from convert to Mormonism to Hare Krishna you should be banned from answerign the door and going out unsupervised.Talk about from frying pan to the fire

Thanks for sharing Happy! As far as my own beliefs go, I would put myself in the " all spirit souls (we) are actually God, but because WE are in illusion" category" that you mentioned. That is rather close to what I believe now although what I believe covers many categories, not just one and really doesn't have a name.

Interesting. :-) Well the technical term for that particular strain of belief is Advaita Vedanta. But impersonalist philosophy is pretty diverse and there are now a great number of strains of philosophical thought that have adopted some variation of that belief.

I don't agree with it personally, but I do absolutely respect your beliefs. I believe that every truly spiritual belief can have some positive value in one's life if applied properly, and can even help one on the way to become a more perfect individual and (from the personalist point of view) devotee/loving servant of God.

thank you. I will do some research on hare Krishna on my own just out of curiosity. It sounds interesting and I'm glad it works for you. Am I understanding correctly though that you were never baptized Mormon? You just investigated it?

Yes, that would be correct. I was an "investigator" for quite a while but I never actually got baptized into the Mormon faith. I did not want to commit to any faith without truly understanding what I was getting into before I claimed to believe, and when I learnt about it - although I do respect it - I did not agree with certain aspects of Mormon belief.

Here are some great resources to learn more:

Hinduism (generally - non-sectarian)
http://hinduism.iskcon.org

Krishnaism/Vaishnava faith in general, and Hare Krishna/Gaudiya Vaishnavism
http://krishna.com

ISKCON specifically
http://iskcon.org

Philosophy and spiritual thought from a Hare Krishna point of view:
http://aboutmybook.com
http://sutapamonk.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.gitacoaching.com/
http://levitate.co.nf/

I hope this helps!

thanks! And sorry that my post brought up some ugly comments. You are cool with me and thanks for the links!

Thank you :-)


The Vedabase website has a bunch of great books (all online, freely available) related to spirituality from the Hare Krishna perspective:
http://vedabase.com/

Here are some great ones to check out:
- The Science of Self-Realization
- The Journey of Self-Discovery
- A Second Chance: The Story of a Near-Death Experience
- Coming Back: The Science of Reincarnation
- Laws of Nature: An Infallible Justice
- Life Comes From Life
- Beyond Birth and Death
- Beyond Illusion and Doubt
- The Quest for Enlightenment
- Civilization and Transcendence
- The Perfection of Yoga
- The Path of Perfection

Also, for lighter reading, there are a bunch of great articles from the Indian website of Back to Godhead magazine:
http://backtogodhead.in/

Hope this helps. :-)

ALSO - a truly solid understanding of the Hare Krishna faith and more generally Vaishnava/Hindu beliefs requires knowing the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita.

Here's a great rendition of it, with the original Sanskrit text, word-by-word translations, explanatory translations, and purports with commentary from the Gaudiya Vaishnava (Hare Krishna) perspective:
http://vedabase.com/en/bg/

This translation is by Srila Prabhupada.

Hope this helps!

This is what always comes to mind when I see Hare Krishnas:

http://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/2009/02/24#.U0qyOPnxSSo

Oh dear. Lol. :-)

lol

nice discussing this topic with you all here & I'm sure this topic will be revisited

M@t