Buddhism FAQ



I have been studying Buddhism and am also attracted to Hinduism. Sometimes I think I understand the truth, at others I feel so far away from it. Can you offer guidance?

Oh boy, are you in trouble...

What is known today as Buddhism has nothing to do with the real Buddha, since the nihilistic teachings of Sakyamuni sponsored by Emperor Ashok have eclipsed the teachings of the original Buddha almost entirely. Similarly, the British-sponsored atheistic nonsense of Sankara has almost eclipsed the original teachings of the Vedas with an impossible theory of monism. 'Hindu' is a Persian racial epithet! No wonder you are confused.

When you think you understand nothing, you are closer to the truth, because you have been completely misled by an illogical and impossible mishmash of false theories born of limited, perverted human intelligence. Teaching people like you is very difficult because your mind is filled with wrong ideas. The only thing that can help you is to dump everything and completely start over with a blank slate.

For starters, acquaint yourself with the real history of the world. Then you have to wean yourself from atheism, voidism, nihilism and monism. These teachings are completely false, completely bogus to the point of being pure evil. Read and hear this podcast for starters.

Then give a careful reading to Bhagavad-gita As It Is. If you are willing to base your faith and understanding on the original Vedic teachings, then we can help you. Otherwise you are just wasting your time.

Most of the so-called 'spiritual' teachings available in the marketplace are based on some form of Hinayana Buddhism or Mayavadi impersonalism. As we have discussed many, many times herein, these are false teachings designed by politically motivated people to cover, hide and misinterpret the original sources they claim to represent. They gradually redefine terms like 'religion' through years of propaganda, until they come to mean whatever they want them to mean.

The power elite always considers real, potent spiritual wisdom dangerous because it empowers people to take guidance directly from the authorized scriptures, the spiritual master and the Lord within; thus equipped with transcendental realization, they cannot be deceived, exploited or manipulated against their will. Therefore the power class sponsors and supports deceptive teachings and philosophies that superficially seem spiritual, but actually undermine the spiritual growth and strength of the people.

The attraction and accessibility of these false teachings stems from their misapplication of material logic to spiritual subjects. We are familiar with material logic, so their arguments superficially seem to make sense; but anyone who actually has a little spiritual knowledge or realization can see right through these false arguments. Spiritual existence and phenomena have their own transcendental ontology and logic, which is completely different from material logic. Once we understand this transcendental logic, we can never again be deceived by specious arguments and false teachings.

The social consequences of false spiritual teachings are especially devastating. If there is no personal God whose pleasure and service constitute the source of all religious and moral principles, then there is no standard of behavior or ultimate goal of life. If we are all god, then we can do whatever we like and never have to say we're sorry. Human life, which is actually for the purpose of complete self-realization, then becomes simply a lawless competition for animal sense enjoyment, a never-ending struggle for power and resources in a temporary, constantly changing existential situation, with no way out except death.

Of course, demoniac people just love that kind of lawless materialism, because it gives them a competitive advantage over pious people who choose to observe moral and religious principles and strive for integrity. Thus in today's demoniac materialist society, the atheistic and voidist teachings thrive, while the authentic devotees of God struggle to be heard at all. This is not an accident, but a calculated, long-term political infowar strategy used at least since the times of the Roman Empire to deceive the public and keep them ignorant of real spiritual knowledge.

If this is not the case, they why did the Council of Nicea edit the Bible under the direction of Emperor Constantine? Why did they murder Jesus' personal disciples, and most of the Christian leaders who attended that conference, and elect Paul the head of the church? What happened during the 17 years of Jesus' life not covered in the edited Gospels? Why are key elements of the Nicene Creed, accepted by all Christians, nowhere to be found in the Bible? (They are fully explained in the Vedas.) Why did the British sponsor the teachings of Sankara, an unknown philosophy teacher, in a country full of famous Vedic scholars and powerful devotees of Krsna? Why did they make these bogus teachings a required course in all their schools and colleges? And why did they name their syncretic religion after a Persian racial slur (roughly the equivalent of creating a phony religion called 'Niggerism' and requiring blacks to learn it in school)?

Why is it that no mainstream publisher will print a book on Vedic culture unless it follows the Mayavadi impersonal philosophy and uses the term 'Hindu' instead of the proper term, Vedic, and calls the Vedas 'mythology' instead of history? Why do all so-called yoga schools and training centers only teach asana, and not the other seven limbs of authentic yoga? Why don't they give their students and clients access to the original Vedic source materials on yoga? Why do the so-called Buddhist schools only study Sakyamuni, and completely ignore the original Buddha, who is an incarnation of Visnu? Why do the Buddhists pervert the understanding of 'emptiness' (absence of real existence in the material world) given in the original Madhyamaka (one of the few extant works of the original Buddha) into a voidist philosophy of nihilism?

If you research these and similar questions, you will see that the publicly known understanding of religious and spiritual teachings is completely false—a smokescreen of disinformation and propaganda designed to cover and hide the original teachings. Political interests spend huge resources promoting these false teachings and establishing them in the mind of the public as the 'real' religions. The bogus religions fight among themselves in public, putting on a good show, but behind the scenes they are all birds of a feather, because the religions and the politicians are both in the business of exploiting the innocent public. Politics and religion are a one-two punch that leaves the citizens confused, reeling, and ripe for exploitation by rapacious multinational corporations and banks. Welcome to Kali-yuga, hope you enjoy your stay.

The only place you will find the real truth discussed is in an authentic esoteric school, at the feet of a self-realized Master Teacher. You should go through the material on this site carefully and systematically, and base your questions in these forums on your reading and hearing. This is a school, a very serious school; and like any school it has a particular course of study and curriculum.

vyavasāyātmikā buddhir
ekeha kuru-nandana
bahu-śākhā hy anantāś ca
buddhayo 'vyavasāyinām

"Those who are on this path are resolute in purpose, and their aim is one. O beloved child of the Kurus, the intelligence of those who are irresolute is many-branched." [Bhagavad-gita 2.41]

Our aim is to realize the Esoteric Teaching of the Vedas, especially as revealed in Bhagavad-gita, Srimad-Bhagavatam and Caitanya-caritamrta. We do not interpret this teaching, because there is no need; the teaching is already perfect and complete because it is originally spoken by Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So we simply repeat the Esoteric Teaching without alteration or change, and sometimes analyze a little to help people understand its inner structure and transcendental logic, and establish a context to put the teaching in perspective.

I hope you take full advantage of this extraordinary opportunity to learn the truth and attain full personal self-realization.






Can we get enlightenment by meditation? According to Buddhism teaching by Siddhartha Gautama, we can get enlightenment by meditation. Sorry that I mention about religion, no offense. I am just curious.

A student answers:

Meditation is a process given by Krsna. However, in this age we are in (Kali-Yuga: the age of ignorance) it is very difficult, if not impossible to achieve enlightenment through meditation. The only kind of meditation that will help us is meditation on the Holy name.

Within this one hour, the whole Bhagavad-gītā was discussed, and Śrī Kṛṣṇa set forth the perfection of all yoga systems to His friend Arjuna. At the end of this great discourse, Arjuna set aside his misgivings and fought.

However, within the discourse, when Arjuna heard the explanation of the meditational system of yoga—how to sit down, how to keep the body straight, how to keep the eyes half-closed and how to gaze at the tip of the nose without diverting one’s attention, all this being conducted in a secluded place, alone—he replied,

yo ’yaṁ yogas tvayā proktaḥ
sāmyena madhusūdana
etasyāhaṁ na paśyāmi
cañcalatvāt sthitiṁ sthirām

“O Madhusūdana, the system of yoga which You have summarized appears impractical and unendurable to me, for the mind is restless and unsteady.” (Bg. 6.33) This is important. We must always remember that we are in a material circumstance wherein at every moment our mind is subject to agitation. Actually we are not in a very comfortable situation. We are always thinking that by changing our situation we will overcome our mental agitation, and we are always thinking that when we reach a certain point, all mental agitations will disappear. But it is the nature of the material world that we cannot be free from anxiety. Our dilemma is that we are always trying to make a solution to our problems, but this universe is so designed that these solutions never come.

Not being a cheater, being very frank and open, Arjuna tells Kṛṣṇa that the system of yoga which He has described is not possible for him to execute.

...

It is indeed a fact that the mind is always telling us to go here, go there, do this, do that—it is always telling us which way to turn. Thus the sum and substance of the yoga system is to control the agitated mind. In the meditational yoga system the mind is controlled by focusing on the Supersoul—that is the whole purpose of yoga. But Arjuna says that controlling this mind is more difficult than stopping the wind from blowing. One can imagine a man stretching out his arms trying to stop a hurricane. Are we to assume that Arjuna is simply not sufficiently qualified to control his mind? The actual fact is that we cannot begin to understand the immense qualifications of Arjuna. After all, he was a personal friend of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This is a highly elevated position and is one that cannot be at all attained by one without great qualifications. In addition to this, Arjuna was renowned as a great warrior and administrator. He was such an intelligent man that he could understand Bhagavad-gītā within one hour, whereas at the present moment great scholars cannot even understand it in the course of a lifetime. Yet Arjuna was thinking that controlling the mind was simply not possible for him. Are we then to assume that what was impossible for Arjuna in a more advanced age is possible for us in this degenerate age? We should not for one moment think that we are in Arjuna’s category. We are a thousand times inferior.

Moreover, there is no record of Arjuna’s having executed the yoga system at any time. Yet Arjuna was praised by Kṛṣṇa as the only man worthy of understanding Bhagavad-gītā. What was Arjuna’s great qualification? Śrī Kṛṣṇa says, “You are My devotee. You are My very dear friend.” Despite this qualification, Arjuna refused to execute the meditational yoga system described by Śrī Kṛṣṇa. What then are we to conclude? Are we to despair the mind’s ever being controlled? No, it can be controlled, and the process is this Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The mind must be fixed always in Kṛṣṇa. Insofar as the mind is absorbed in Kṛṣṇa, it has attained the perfection of yoga.

Now when we turn to the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, in the Twelfth Canto we find Śukadeva Gosvāmī telling Mahārāja Parīkṣit that in the golden age, the Satya-yuga, people were living for one hundred thousand years, and at that time, when advanced living entities lived for such lengths of time, it was possible to execute this meditational system of yoga. But what was achieved in the Satya-yuga by this meditational process, and in the following yuga, the Tretā-yuga, by the offering of great sacrifices, and in the next yuga, the Dvāpara-yuga, by temple worship, would be achieved at the present time, in this Kali-yuga, by simply chanting the names of God, hari-kīrtana, Hare Kṛṣṇa. So from authoritative sources we learn that this chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare/ Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare is the embodiment of the perfection of yoga for this age.

Today we have great difficulties living fifty or sixty years. A man may live at the utmost eighty or a hundred years. In addition, these brief years are always fraught with anxiety, with difficulties due to circumstances of war, pestilence, famine and so many other disturbances. We’re also not very intelligent, and, at the same time, we’re unfortunate. These are the characteristics of man living in Kali-yuga, a degraded age. So properly speaking, we can never attain success in this meditational yoga system described by Kṛṣṇa. At the utmost we can only gratify our personal whims by some pseudoadaptation of this system. Thus people are paying money to attend some classes in gymnastic exercises and deep-breathing, and they’re happy if they think they can lengthen their lifetimes by a few years or enjoy better sex life. But we must understand that this is not the actual yoga system. In this age that meditational system cannot be properly executed. Instead, all of the perfections of that system can be realized through bhakti-yoga, the sublime process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, specifically mantra-yoga, the glorification of Śrī Kṛṣṇa through the chanting of Hare Kṛṣṇa. That is recommended in Vedic scriptures and is introduced by great authorities like Caitanya Mahāprabhu. Indeed, the Bhagavad-gītā proclaims that the mahātmās, the great souls, are always chanting the glories of the Lord. If one wants to be a mahātmā in terms of the Vedic literature, in terms of Bhagavad-gītā and in terms of the great authorities, then one has to adopt this process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness and of chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. But if we’re content at making a show of meditation by sitting very straight in lotus position and going into a trance like some sort of performer, then that is a different thing. But we should understand that such show-bottle performances have nothing to do with the actual perfection of yoga. The material disease cannot be cured by artificial medicine. We have to take the real cure straight from Kṛṣṇa. [The Perfection of Yoga]

So if Arjuna couldn't perform this kind of meditation, what chance do we have in the kind of society we have today? It may help in regards to material things but it will not help us achieve true enlightenment, or liberation from this material world.
There is nothing wrong with mentioning religion here. If you search the forums you will see many religions have been discussed numerous times. How can there be Absolute truth otherwise?

I am familiar with Buddhism (I am studying world religions at the moment). However, you should be aware of the many problems with Buddhism, most notably the faulty conclusions it has about the world, and the difference in the presentation of it today compared to its true history.

The goal of enlightenment according to many modern interpretations of Buddhism is that we come from a void and so we must realize this nothingness. However, this is impossible. I recommend you listen to these podcasts which discuss this indepth.

Seduced by untruth

-Youtube link

Oneness means nothingness

-Youtube link

I dont see the connection

I strongly recommend you listen to the audio because they contain extra commentary on the essays.

Further from this, the Siddhartha Gautama/ Śakyamuni Buddha is not even the original Buddha. The original Buddha actually was an incarnation of the Supreme Lord and is mentioned in the Srimad Bhagavatam. There is a nice darshan here where Babaji discusses the differences between the two. If you search this site/forum, causelessmercy, or the Vedabase then you will find much more information on Buddhism and its relation to this teaching. You can find a link to the Vedabase at the bottom of this page: New visitors.

That should keep you going for a while

I have heard you say that Hinayana is false Buddhism by false Buddha and  Mahāyana is the Real Theistic Buddhism by original Buddha. What exactly do you mean?

There were two Buddhas. Śakyamuni Buddha appeared about 2500 years ago, and the original Buddha appeared about 3000 years ago. The original Buddha is accepted in the Esoteric Teaching as an incarnation of Viṣṇu, in fact one of the ten principal avataras of Viṣṇu. He appeared to stop the abuse of animals in the name of the Vedas.

Lord Buddha, a powerful incarnation of the Personality of Godhead, appeared in the province of Gaya (Bihar) as the son of Anjana, and he preached his own conception of nonviolence and deprecated even the animal sacrifices sanctioned in the Vedas. At the time when Lord Buddha appeared, the people in general were atheistic and preferred animal flesh to anything else. On the plea of Vedic sacrifice, every place was practically turned into a slaughterhouse, and animal-killing was indulged in unrestrictedly.

Lord Buddha preached nonviolence, taking pity on the poor animals. He preached that he did not believe in the tenets of the Vedas and stressed the adverse psychological effects incurred by animal-killing. Less intelligent men of the age of Kali, who had no faith in God, followed his principle, and for the time being they were trained in moral discipline and nonviolence, the preliminary steps for proceeding further on the path of God realization.

He deluded the atheists because such atheists who followed his principles did not believe in God, but they kept their absolute faith in Lord Buddha, who himself was the incarnation of God. Thus the faithless people were made to believe in God in the form of Lord Buddha. That was the mercy of Lord Buddha: he made the faithless faithful to him. He originated the Mahāyana or "great Vehicle" of Buddhism, which is a theistic form of Buddha-worship leading to a Pure Land or spiritual abode of the Buddha.

The false Buddha, Sakyamuni preached nihilism, or meditation on nothingness. This doctrine is based on a misunderstanding of the original Buddha's philosophy of the Middle Way (madhyāmaka). When the original Buddha used the term nothingness (sunyata), He was referring to the absence of real existence. As stated in Bhagavad-gita [2.16]

nāsato vidyate bhāvo
nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ
ubhayor api dṛṣṭo ’ntas
tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ

Those who are seers of the truth have concluded that of the nonexistent there is no endurance, and of the existent there is no cessation. This the seers have concluded by studying the nature of both.

In other words, only spiritual things really exist, because they are eternal. Thus this transitory world of material phenomena is devoid of real existence. It is simply 'the empty pouring into the void.'

In a classic case of faulty duplication, the original Buddha's teaching was misconstrued by Sakyamuni Buddha to mean that emptiness is the only real existence. As a result, the Buddhism we know today is completely opposed to the original teaching.

You mention that Shankara and Buddhism are not considered pure lineages. Does this mean that knowledge and experience of samadhi taught by these schools is not true?

Yep. You cannot find, and they cannot demonstrate, anyone who has attained the state of samadhi as they define it. Such a person would be comatose, a vegetable, unresponsive to all external stimuli. He would probably die very soon after attaining such samadhi. Real samadhi as attained through bhakti-yoga is active, dynamic, and can occur simultaneously with an active external life.

I work with a Buddhist who claims that everyone has their own path to God and this is Absolute. How should I approach preaching to him?

Buddhists are tricky. They say they have an absolute truth that all truth is relative. This, of course, is a logical paradox on the order of "This statement is a lie." Or more precisely, "All statements are lies: except this one." This is a typical ontological singularity. Everyone but the drunk can see clearly that he is drunk; but he claims that they are wrong because they are drunk, and only he is not. How to deal with someone in a self-justifying black hole of ignorance?

The problem with Buddhism is that it is historically and philosophically corrupt. Buddhists don't like to talk about it, but the original Buddha—the one mentioned in Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.24 and other places in the Vedas as an incarnation of Krsna—appeared some time before the historical Sakyamuni Buddha. Sakyamuni changed the original philosophy. It was Sakyamuni's nihilist/voidist Buddhism, not the teachings of the original Buddha, that was picked up by Emperor Ashok and spread all over India by political means. As a result, the history and philosophy are muddled, and most Buddhists are confused about the two Buddhas.

The history of Buddhism has striking parallels with the history of Christianity, and for many similar reasons. In both cases, a divinely empowered Master teaches a radical spiritual path that awakens many people to their real spiritual nature. But later, the original teaching is nullified and changed, a false prophet (Paul or Sakyamuni) is installed as the founder of the organized religion, and a more politically useful official standard version of the religion is widely propagated by political and military force.

About the only work of the original Buddha still extant is the famous Madhyamaka or 'middle path', but of course it has been heavily edited. Although the Madhyamaka is used as the rationalization for the Buddhist philosophy of 'emptiness', the way this is understood in contemporary Buddhism is distorted. Madhyamaka is a Mahayana tradition, so why do the Hinayana Buddhists reference it to support their philosophy of 'emptiness' or 'nothingness' as the absolute?

I had the good fortune to spend a summer near a big lake in the Vermont woods with the Dalai Lama and the monks who tour around doing shows of sacred Tibetan ceremonial music and dance. They were taking a break from the road, at his insistence, to study and contemplate as monks should. The study text was, guess what: Madhyamaka. Through some friends I got hired on as the cook, and also got to attend many of the sessions.

The most striking thing about the Madhyamaka teaching is its close resemblance with the Sāṅkhya philosophy taught by Lord Kapila in Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.25-33. The only difference is that Madhyamaka has been stripped of all references to the Supreme Lord; otherwise it is virtually identical. It remains one of the most powerful and convincing arguments for the existence of God that I have ever heard.

In brief, the Madhyamaka argues that because all material objects have a cause, and that cause has a cause, et cetera, nothing in this world has independent or absolute existence. All existences are dependent on some prior existence; therefore this world, and the objects we encounter within it, are empty (śūnyatā) of real existence.

In other words, the śūnyatā of Madhyamaka is not an absolute emptiness, but simply the emptiness of real existence in the material world. But later Buddhists, beginning with Sakyamuni and the Hinayana school, generalized this śūnyatā to the status of an all-pervading absolute. IMHO they were simply getting high by contemplating an inconceivable truth: things certainly seem to exist, yet on closer inspection they do not have real substantial independent existence. Kind of makes your head spin, sure, and up to this point we also agree.

But this kind of speculative philosophy is no substitute for real positive Absolute Truth like we have in the Vaisnava school. It's like the Buddhists have taken Vedic philosophy and just cut out anything that refers to God, the soul or the spiritual world. Of course, that has the effect of removing the transcendental background or context, and putting the emphasis on the material world as context, since that's the only thing left. But then they show that the material world is empty of real existence, so you have nothing left to stand on. So sorry! You have been cheated, and now it's too late. No wonder Buddhist culture is so violent; they're angry at being cheated.

Let's restate the fundamental ontological truth that spiritual entities and phenomena are not observable in a material context. That's why Western science has made so little progress in the study of consciousness. They try to apply the same methods and background used to study matter to entities and phenomena that are fundamentally transcendent. Without a context of Absolute Truth as supplied by the Vedas, they mistakenly conclude that spiritual things do not really exist, but are just epiphenomena of the brain.

The same trick is used by the Buddhists to cheat everyone. First they deny the Vedas, removing the positive transcendental context necessary to observe spiritual phenomena. Then they point out that the material world is empty of real existence. So you are left with nothing. Might as well just commit suicide, because everything we are and do is nothing, and after death we cease to exist. What a bogus philosophy!

If you want to know the real value of any philosophy, judge by the result. If we analyze the social history of Buddhism, we see that like the materialistic Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, it has resulted in tremendous destruction across the centuries. Maybe the monks are superficially non-violent, but by preaching that there is no God in control, they have fostered so much violence and cruelty among people in general. Buddhist culture is ultimately death-oriented, because according to their philosophy, death is the only escape from the suffering of material existence.

Atheists can never be convinced of the existence of God, and they always use the same context-switching trick to deny the actual evidence of God. They hate God, and want to kill Him and His spiritual children, just like a psychotic who rants that everyone is dead, or the drunk who claims that everyone else is drunk but him. They are actually insane, and even if you defeat them with good arguments they will not accept, so it is a waste of time and effort to preach to such rascals. Plus they always make offensive and insulting statements against God and His devotees that can be very painful to hear.

That said, sometimes a debate with atheist rascals is productive because you get to present your case, and hearing that benefits the people who witness the discussion. I call this 'preaching theater.' You are not actually trying to convert the atheist, but the argument gives you a good platform for expressing your point of view. It's a judgment call, and a matter of experience whether to get involved in such discussions. If you feel that you can at least hold your own position and not get defeated (at least in the eyes of the audience), then go for it.




Can you point me to a source where I can read more about this historical discrepancy in the Buddhism?

Unfortunately I do not have any access to the rare and esoteric Tibetan Buddhist materials I studied during that summer with the Dalai Lama. It was His opinion that there were many Buddhas before Sakyamuni, and He saw no essential contradiction between Madhyamaka and Sankhya philosophy. In fact He agreed with my assertion that Madhyamaka strongly implies the existence of an absolute Deity and spiritual world.

But then, remember that the Tibetan Buddhists left India because they saw that the Buddhist teachings were being changed, and they wanted to preserve the original understanding and practices. They belong to the Mahayana 'pure land' tradition that accepts the eternal existence of the spiritual world, and sees the Buddha as an absolute Deity in those realms. Externally they compromise somewhat with the Hinayana school by saying that ultimately everything is void, but there are also these pure worlds where the Buddha and His devotees exist in perfect purity, complete knowledge and eternal bliss. Tibetan Buddhism is basically Vedic philosophy and spiritual culture, even including Deity worship, mantras, kirtan, the works.

Academic articles almost uniformly position Sakyamuni as the first Buddha. So what? They also talk about Hinduism, which is less than 250 years old, as if it were the original religion of 'India', wherever that is (the actual name of the country is Bharata, people; check the money and the flag). And they talk about the Roman Catholic theology as if it was the original philosophy of Jesus, which it is not. Most so-called religious scholarship is pure politics and propaganda, having nothing to do with the actual history or philosophy of the enlightened beings.



Are the Tibetan Buddhists related to the Vedic ontology? I like the Tibetans style, they have some interesting art, cool hats and trance drumming.  Are these Tibetans coming from the Viṣṇu Buddha?

Tibetan Buddhism, like any ancient religious culture, has a lot of different influences and schools. But there is a curious disconnect between their philosophy, which is atheistic like the rest of Buddhism, and their practices, many of which come from the Vedas. For example, many Dzogchen Buddhists consider the Dalai Lama to be an incarnation of the Bodhisattva Avalokitesvara, who is considered more or less identical with Lord Viṣṇu. They also have many ritualistic practices involving Deity forms and names taken from Vedic sources, like Kalachakra and Tara.

The whole field of Buddhism is such a confused mess because the teachings of the original Viṣṇu Buddha have been covered up by the much later impersonal and voidist teaching of the Sakyamuni Buddha. It's better to stick with Śrīla Prabhupāda's books and avoid confusion. But yes, their hats are pretty cool.

< Prev		Next >