Quote
20bluemoons
I have no complaints against Siddha, except that he has set himself up as a God.
Siddha didn't set himself up as God, the doctrine did. The problem is when Bhaktivedanta brought the belief to the West, the West wasn't ready then for the Eastern concept of God. In Hindu tradition everybody is God, everybody is given the same respect as our gurus. The concept of God is beyond our understanding, beyond our description and way, way beyond our minds' capacity. That's exactly the meaning of transcendental. The concept just transcends everything that we are humanly capable of. And it branches into so many forms of practice like deity worship (where Bhakti Yoga is in) wherein the concept of God is reduced to anthropomorphic personalities like Krishna, Shiva, etc. so we humans can relate to and get to experience God (or Brahman). This is the only way humans can know God, through experience, everything else, including knowledge just falls short. Just like an ant to other ants describing what the ocean is like. The ant's brain just ceases to function in understanding what an ocean is like. Once you believe your doctrine it's like telling everybody that the water in the bottle that you're holding is the ocean. Get my point? There's nothing wrong with any form of worship as long as you are aware that that is just a method out of countless other methods to reach and experience the bigger realm that is God.
Siddha and the Iskcon didn't have this Eastern concept of God and adapted the belief from their Indian guru into Western Judeo-Christian mindset. So when Bhagavad-Gita says that the pure devotee is as good as God, it stops there. Siddha concluded the same, he had no choice but to believe that himself, the holy book said so. He was regarded as a pure devotee, he was therefore as good as God. But in Hindu tradition, even a guest in the house should be regarded as God, there's nothing so transcendentally big deal about that, you'll see cows around roaming free in the streets of Bombay and they are to the Hindus pure devotees too, and as good as God. But not the God that we westerners know of. But the God that is present in all living and even non-living matters. Hindus can declare a rock as an object of worship and people will have no qualms about it. God is spreadout to the whole population and nothing is blasphemous about that. Their concept of God is totally different from ours. You don't look at the finger when one is pointing you the moon. Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, they all tried to represent something beyond them but we instead got bogged down to who they were.
Perhaps it's time for Chris to wake up and free himself and his followers from this illusion. There's nothing wrong with trying to reach out and experience God (or Brahman) through a particular method, but this concept of me as good as God and I'm above everybody else should go. If people insist on their methods, they can do so and play this game but enough of preaching that theirs is the only true method. The reason cults are very prevalent among the western religions is because of our very feeble and constant attempt to enclose God into our human thinking. We know now how vast this physical universe is, and it would be so arrogant of us to believe that our species and way of thinking could really unravel the awesome mystery it holds. And if God is bigger than the universe, poor Chris, he's got way, way bigger shoes to fill in than he could ever imagined, that is if he insists on his Western concept of God.
Ant to an ocean is an overstatement, an atom to an ocean would be more representative of how puny we are to the power that we ignorantly claim. If only followers can appreciate this analogy, then gurus like Chris will start having second thoughts on things they say and claim. They need blind followers to exist, if light is spread out to many then there won't be any of them few enlightened ones anymore.