TEXAS FAITH 66: The Mormon Moment

Dallas Morning News,

Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

In March, we talked some about Mitt Romney and his Mormonism. But since then Romney has become the presumptive GOP nominee.

This has led to a number of pieces about the so-called "Mormon moment, including one I wrote in today'sMorning News. Mormon leaders, understandably, may be wearying of that cliché. But it is true that church members have a teachable moment before them.

Specifically, they have a chance to demystify elements of their faith, which polls show is still not very well understood by many of us. In my book, this is best done through in a friend-to-friend, neighbor-to-neighbor, pew-to-pew way. That approach allows for more candid conversations and helps build bridges.

David Campbell, a Notre Dame political scientist and a Mormon, said in an interview I did with him last week that those personal bonds are especially important. They keep in check the tensions that are likely to arise in a society that has so many different faiths.

With that as the set-up, here is this week's question:

What issue would you most like to discuss with a Mormon about their religious faith?

Perhaps you already have done this, so feel free to elaborate upon that in your answer.

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Ever journey begins not only with the destination in mind but also with the starting point. If you do not have a GPS signal the address you enter into your device will be of little use. So similarly our goal may be God, or happiness, but a proper venture cannot be taken without recognizing your current position. It is for this reason that I feel that a preliminary discussion on the metaphysics of the self, the soul, to be necessary.

We all act according to our conception of our constitutional position. How we view our existence. Do we see the body as the self? The mind? The intelligence? Or are we something completely beyond body?

In my experience if someone thinks himself to be the body and mind, then their plan for happiness will be built with purpose of satisfying the body and mind. And even if they are religious they will seek blessing from God only for their body and mind. Such as, "God please provide me my daily bread, a car, a TV, health, wealth, good family, and so on" What else is their to ask for if you are your body?

However, if you are not the body, as the Vedas claim, if you are simply a passenger in an ever changing vehicle, then satisfying the needs of the vehicle will not satisfy you, the driver of the vehicle. Just as polishing the cage does not take care of the hungry stomach of the bird, our material efforts for happiness will fail if we do not have valid understanding of the self.

As a mansion is build on a strong foundation, so similarly religion must be philosophically and intelligently supported. Starting with the topic that is closest to us, ourselves. The question and answer must put forward, "Who, or more so, what am I?" This is the dialogue that I usually pursue with my Mormon friends and other religious folks.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

TEXAS FAITH 65: Catholic bishops and civil disobedience

Dallas Morning News,

Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

How far should people of faith go in resisting laws they consider unjust?

I raise this because last week the nation's Catholic bishops, as the AP reported, "urged resistance to laws that church officials consider unjust."

The story explained how the bishops urged "fellow Catholics and fellow Americans to be on guard, for religious liberty is under attack, both at home and abroad." The report also noted the clash between theObama administration and Catholic leaders earlier this year over the requirement for most employers to cover the birth control costs of their employees. Since then, the White House has offered a compromise, but the issue has not necessarily gone away.

Perhaps you agree that religious liberty is under attack, perhaps you don't. I'm not looking for an assessment of that. Rather, I would like your thoughts about how far people of faith should go in resisting laws they consider immoral.

I'm sure we all would agree that there is room for civil disobedience, but societies also require a certain amount of cohesion to function. For example, just because someone opposes a war does that give them the right to stop paying taxes that would benefit the Pentagon?

This issue matters enormously to people of faith and the larger secular society. Read on for informative answers.

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

How far should people go in resisting laws that they consider unjust?

One should to the fullest extent intelligently resist what they consider to be unjust.

However it should be pointed out that most of problems are due to a lack of spiritual consciousness. Therefore solutions must be put in place with this understanding in mind.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

TEXAS FAITH 64: The Intellect and Religious Faith

Dallas Morning News,

Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

What is the role of the intellect in discovering and maintaining a religious faith?

That is the question for this week, and it is spurred on in part from two thoughtful columns drawing attention to a lessening of an intellectual emphasis in two major wings of American Christianity: liberal Protestantism and evangelical Protestantism.
The first column is a Wall Street Journal review of author Marilynne Robinson's new book When I was a Child I Read Books . In it, the review says, Robinson argues that mainline Protestantism got sidelined "by retreating from the cultivation and celebration of learning and of beauty...as if people were less than God made them and in need of nothing so much as of condescension. "
The second column is by the Washington Post's E.J. Dionne, Jr. He chides (gently) Christians in general and evangelicals in particular for diminishing the role of the mind in exploring faith. Writes Dionne:
"Popular Christianity often seems to denigrate rather than celebrate intellectual life and critical inquiry. This not only ignores Christian giants of philosophy and science but also plays into some of the very worst stereotypes inflicted upon religious believers."
Later on, he says:

"Some Christians encourage a view of their faith as profoundly anti-intellectual. Faith is seen as more about experience than reason, more about loyalty than dialogue. The desire to assert The Truth takes priority over exploring productively and honestly what the truth might be."

At the end, after quoting with admiration evangelical scholar Mark Noll, Dionne concludes:

" If Easter is about liberation, this liberation must include intellectual freedom."

Perhaps you agree with these assessments, or perhaps you don't. Either way I would like to hear your thoughts about the role the mind plays in opening one up to a religious faith and then sustaining it over time.

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Krishna Consciousness is a science, and intelligence is one of the tools of the experimental lab work. But because intelligence is material it cannot create spiritual information, it can only be employed in examining it.

For example I am sitting here in East Dallas and if I want valid information on Japan, the information has to come from Japan. If the agency of information (TV, web, university), had no known connection to some type of study or visit to Japan, then I would doubt its veracity. So similarly information about spiritual subjects must come from a non-material source.

In the beginning intelligence may be able to realize some basic spiritual truths without assistance of an outside informant. But in the higher levels of spiritual learning, intelligence is the examiner rather than the discoverer.

For example, the intelligence can discover or realize that the soul, the self, is different from the body. But what exactly is soul's nature is or what is its eternal form or position must be understood by a source that is not of this world.

Aroha-pantha, the inductive process of receiving information will not yield information that is otherworldly, rather it only takes place through avaroha-pantha, or the deductive process. Meaning basically that knowledge of God must come from God down to us rather than our senses and tools stretching up to God.

This body is compared to a chariot. Our senses are the horses, guiding and attracting us and thus moving us. The mind is the reins that control the senses, saying, "I like this, I don't like this,"

However the mind, the reins, are ultimately controlled by a superior, the intelligence which acts as a driver. Just as the senses may be attracted to a cigarette, the mind as well, but the intelligence can intervene and dictate that it is not good for us. But the driver of this chariot works under the desires of the passenger, the soul. So the soul may choose to go towards God, and employ his driver, the intelligence to the task at hand or the soul may choose simply to serve the senses and mind and wander about in a chariot with a weak or ill intended driver.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

I also added in the comment section.

Nityananda Chandra Das

I also wanted to add that if God is the most intelligent being, He should then have the most intelligent philosophy. That is primarily how one can initially see God, is to see the intelligence of His philosophy. For example when I first began to read, and also to this day, books such as the Bhagavad Gita As It Is I remain continually amazed at its intelligence

TEXAS FAITH 63: Is God good?

Dallas Morning News,

Each week we will post a question to a panel of about two dozen clergy, laity and theologians, all of whom are based in Texas or are from Texas. They will chime in with their responses to the question of the week. And you, readers, will be able to respond to their answers through the comment box.

If you believe in God, do you believe God is good? If so, why?

If you don't believe God is good, please explain.

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

“The magnanimous nature of the Lord is better understood when we have a framework to understand the apparent irregularities of this world. In this world we see a lot of pain. There is disease, death, old age and even those who too young to be held accountable for karma or sin are subjected to severe suffering.

This situation is certainly a valid cause for doubts. Just as if I were to walk into a grocery store and was attacked by the cashier, I would naturally question the benevolence of the manager. For many this question is difficult, not to be discussed in religious circles. However, there is an intelligent structure by which all apparent anomalies can be subsided.

If we view the living entity, the soul, as a being who has no destruction but does have a creation, the faults of the world which afflict the soul at birth and even while within the womb would be then be the fault of God, the being who put the soul in that situation. On the other hand, if the soul, the person who inhabits the ever changing body, had a life and activities prior to his present birth then that opens the door to many other possibilities. Just as it can be understood that if I had performed criminal activities in the grocery store on previous days it should not a surprise to me if the cashier tackles me down to be arrested.

We all carry the baggage of our previous lives, our karmas, and are thus subjected to them. Just as a honey bee takes nectar from various plants which results in a certain flavor of honey, so similar activities and desires of our previous lives results in the situations that we are faced in our this life.

Why are we here in the first place? According to the Vedas, to be born in this world means that we have some desire to be independent of God. God has created this world to facilitate our wayward desires. Because in order for a loving relationship to be true there must be the element of choice. Love can never be forced, like a gun to the head.

So we see the general mentality here to be served rather than serve. Therefore, this material existence is a place for the soul to assert its independence to try to play God. In this play we step on others' toes and receive the karmic reaction.

However Sri Krishna, God, is very kind that He and His representatives regularly descend to this world to impart knowledge to us, to teach us how we can be free from suffering. To act in our natural function as part of a whole. If the hand nourishes the stomach, it also is for the hand's own benefit. Encouraging us to act in this yoga is one of the ways the Lord shows His love. He does not force us. Rather just encourages from a distance. But if we take one step He takes a 100 steps towards us.

He not only provides spiritual instructions but also everything we need to live is provided by the Lord. Food, light, warmth, air, water, everything is provided even for the insignificant ant.”

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

A discussion ensued with another panelist and I.   He stated that “(God) It  is not a being, not a thing, and not an entity but simply the energy that caused a "balanced universe" and functions on the principle of balance, where every component of it is programmed to seek its own balance; both physical and metaphysical.  For lack of linguistic expression, we normally address God as "him" instead of "her." God only knows what it is. Indeed, we have created God in our own image. ”

Nityananda Chandra Das

Dear Ghouse, I am not sure if you will see this as this is an old thread. My contention is that basically every theology admits God as the source. As sun is the source of sunlight.

Would you think that the sun is actually cold, unlike its sunlight?

Sat karyavad. In the cause the effect is also found. So if I am a being how can my source only be relegated to a energy?

The Vedas define God as shaktiman, the source of all energies, rather than just an impersonal energy.

Śrī Īśopanisad 16
pūsann ekarse yama sūrya prājāpatya
vyūha raśmīn samūha
tejo yat te rūpaḿ kalyāna-tamaḿ
tat te paśyāmi yo 'sāv asau purusah so 'ham asmi
O my Lord, O primeval philosopher, maintainer of the universe, O regulating principle, destination of the pure devotees, well-wisher of the progenitors of mankind, please remove the effulgence of Your transcendental rays so that I can see Your form of bliss. You are the eternal Supreme Personality of Godhead, like unto the sun, as am I.

MikeGhouse

Dear Chandra Das,
When I referred to God as energy, I did not relegate it to passive energy; I did not perceive it in various grades either. God is active energy, for lack of more descriptive word. It is not static, it is dynamic and maintaining a continual equilibrium. It is all within the realm of that energy. Life is all about seeking balance and the freeing oneself from the factors that throw us off the balance.
I have difficulty conjuring up a form for that energy, although I understand, it is human to have an imaginative God and we perceive it in our own image – we have not been able to free ourselves from that imagination – even the alien movies we make; they still have a similar structure like ours.

 Nityananda Chandra Das

Dear Ghouse, Many perceive that by accepting that God has a form we limit God, a man made proposition. Imposing humanity upon God. However the same can be said of the idea that God is formless. That is also a limitation, "God is only this way, without form" However you have a form but your source cannot. This is illogical, but as was pointed out in this upcoming article logic is a tool of examination rather than tool of discovery. We examine must the info that is given to see if it is logical. But it is not that logic alone can discover the nature of God. That knowledge must come from the source itself.
The Vedas proclaim that God is the Energetic, the possessor and employer of the energy, and at the same time He is also in the energy as well. One and yet different. Monism and Dualism. Just as the drop of ocean water shares the salty quality of the ocean but differs in it quantity. Therefore God is also in this world but at the same time God has His own existence, His own form. The gurus have examined the logic of this, as well as myself and I find, as did they, that it stands solid.

Power and the powerhouse, energy and the energetic

MikeGhouse

Dear Chandra Das,
Indeed, a formless and formful God are possibilities for our imagination. And I do agree with you, "Therefore God is also in this world but at the same time God has His own existence, His own form." There is a couplet in my language Urdu -
Banday ko khuda mat kaho, banda khuda nahin,
lekin phir bhi juda, banday say khuda nahin
Don't call man "the God", man is not God,
yet, these two are inseparable, man is not distinct from his creator
Mike Ghouse.

Kirtan Dance class at Irma Rangel Leadership School For Girls

After our Kirtan and Drum show in the auditorium we invited kids for face painting and kirtan dance class in the cafeteria.

Full story on ISKCON New - ISKCON Dallas Visits Young Women’s Leadership School

Kirtan for 500 students at Irma Rangel Leadership School

After the mrdanga presentation of Kalindi and Sri Rupa, Advaita Acarya Das gets the crowd involved as they spontaneously rush the stage and dance.
featuring an appearance by Giriraj Swami!

Full story on ISKCON News - ISKCON Dallas Visits Young Women’s Leadership School

Women are like fire & men are like butter

nanv agniḥ pramadā nāma
ghṛta-kumbha-samaḥ pumān - Nārada Muni

Noted in Scientific American, a popular science magazine, was a scientific study that illustrated that men became significantly “Cognitively Impaired”, or so to say stupid, in the presence of a woman.  This study also very clearly illustrated something that I always thought the analogy of Narada Muni hints to. That women, like the fire, are unaffected by the butter.  See the short article here.