Guruvani

>

If you ask me, the idea that a worm in stool has a spiritual body as a gopi or gopa etc. in Goloka but has forgotten about that and is now dreaming that he is a worm in stool is repugnant and disgusting. If there is no more security and safety for the pure devotees of Krishna than that, then I am not so sure that I want to be a devotee of a God who lets his pure devotees fall to such deplorable conditions. The truth is that pure devotees of Krishna DO NOT fall into such deplorable conditions and to say that they do is just the most ridiculous apasiddhanta that I have ever heard. It is a slap in the face to Krishna to say that his pure devotees are falling down and rejecting him by unlimited numbers of fallen souls. I do not agree to slap Krishna in the face like that. I think it is an abomination to preach such nonsense.

My question for Sarva Gatah (Vigraha etc.) is does he also believe that the worms in his intestines also have spiritual bodies in Goloka like Radha and Krishna? Or, does he just think that certain souls like himself have a spiritual body in Goloka and the worms in his intestines or the other unlimited sparks of life in the brahmajyoti do not also have a dormant spiritual body in Goloka just like Radha and Krishna? Believe me, I know it is hard to imagine that the souls in the worms in stool are my brothers whose souls are equal to me. None the less, that is what shastra tells us and that is the bitter pill of truth concerning the jiva-tattva that we all must accept and surrender to if we truly intend to cultivate the Vedic knowledge of shastra.

What Sarva Gatha and others like him are having a problem with is accepting the humble position that they are just a speck of spiritual energy 10,000th the size the tip of a hair. They cannot accept such a humble conception of themselves. They have to think that they are actually eternal parshadas of Krishna with a body just like Radha or Krishna. Well, the truth is that they ARE just tiny sparks of life and they DO NOT yet have a spiritual body like Radha or Krishna's. They cannot even imagine such a humble position of the soul as just being no different or not better than the other unlimited sparks of life that are within the brahmajyoti of Krishna. So, really, they have an ego problem. They are puffed-up and thinking themselves as much better and superior to the sparks of life that are within the brahmajyoti. Unless and until they realize and accept their humble position they will never attain the spiritual body that they already think they have. Their philosophy contradicts everything the shastra says about the nature of marginal conditioned souls.

Well, there is such a prohibition. Shastra and the acharyas say that overendeavering for mundane things that are very difficult to attain is prohibited. Such silly remarks actually can be refuted with shastra. The ritvik system really can't be if you understand the power, authority and position a true acharya and representative of Krishna actually possesses. So, your efforts to debunk the ritvik idea with silly comparisons fails miserably. If you can show some shastric support for your claim that a ritvik system is prohibited then please do. Otherwise, you are just trying to demean the faith of others with your humorous jabs at the ritvik system. How easily we forget that Sridhar Maharaja appointed Govinda Maharaja as ritvik "from now on he will initiate on my behalf as ritvik". Maybe you could show a little more respect for a system that Srila Sridhar Maharaja also employed in his mission. The result of deviating from the ritvik system at SCSMath is that after Govinda Maharaja is gone the mission will fizzle-out into an ISKCON-like camp of dozens of little gurus all competing for disciples as career gurus in the Matha. These scenarios were foreseen by the acharyas and they tried to prevent such a mess with ritvik systems but their most trusted followers abandoned such protective measures and created a situation where in the future the parampara system will be a cheap dimestore version of a most sacred and holy principle.

All of those points would have to be validated by shastric reference, otherwise they are just imaginary fantasies. If you can show those points with reference from shastra then you have something going. Otherwise, it's just some fantasies that need to find the dust bin of speculation. We shouldn't speculate or improvise siddhanta. Each and every idea we have must be validated by shastra or it is useless.

The language professor weighs in. He says: </sigh> Professor, think OUT OF THE BOX! I hope you are doing well here in my beloved home state of Florida. <sigh> </sigh>

It's from the vedabase.net. Since you inquired I compared it to a 1972 edition of Sri Isopanisad and in fact there is a slight difference in the wording. In the 1972 edition it reads: There are a couple of errors in the punctuation of the original. But, instead of just correcting the errors in punctuation, the BBT editors deemed it necessary to change the wording also. The current vedabase.net version is: The meaning is the same. But, they have changed some wording. I think they could have just corrected the punctuation without changing the wording. Perfect sentence structure is not very important. They could have fixed the punctuation without changing the wording, even if the wording in the original was a little awkward according to the rules of proper sentence structure.

Right, because the basis if impersonal Brahman is Krishna. Otherwise, the marginal living entities are falling down from the brahmajyoti as Srila Prabhupada explains in this purport: The brahmajyoti is impersonal but it's basis is a person - Krishna. So, the origin of the marginal jivas is the impersonal feature of the Supreme Person - Krishna. Our member Sarva Gatah seems to be saying that their is no such thing as a brahmajyoti. He seems to just be in denial that the brahmajyoti exists and is comprised of unlimited living entities devoid of devotional service and falling down into maya because of the lack of devotional service. The fact is, there REALLY is a brahmajyoti comprised of unlimited living entities who are the souls who fall down into maya from the marginal plane of the Viraja where they are manifested by the marginal potency of Maha-Vishnu. Krishna devotees in Goloka never fall down or fall into illusion. Lord Krishna makes it clear in Bhagavad-gita that they are infallible and unaffected by maya. They do not fall down. In fact they are infallible and CANNOT fall down.

Sri Isopanishad 17 purport, <!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote: <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> As we have learned from previous mantras, the brahmajyoti emanating from the transcendental body of the Lord is full of spiritual sparks that are individual entities with the full sense of existence. Sometimes these living entities want to enjoy their senses, and therefore they are placed in the material world to become false lords under the dictation of the senses.</td></tr></tbody></table>

No, that is wrong. Shastra forbids worship of demigods, cartoon characters and other assorted creations of maya. Shastra recommends worship of the acharya. Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 3.29.17 purport, So, shastra is quite clear on the matter of worshiping THE acharya. (not to be confused with the host of make-believe gurus who disobey their acharya and falsely assume the position of acharya for the purpose of being career gurus) (yes, him too!)

Obvious?Not hardly. Not at all. His senior disciples had only been devotees for no more than 10 or 12 years when Srila Prabhupada left. Obvious? To whom? A deaf, dumb and blind man? Show me one statement from Srila Prabhupada saying that the ritvik system could not continue after his passing. You can't. Such a statement does not exist. Srila Prabhupada NEVER prohibited the ritvik system from continuing after his passing. If he wanted it to stop he would have said so. He didn't!

I just wonder why Srila Prabhupada never bothered to mention even one time that his ritvik system could not be continued after his samadhi? I don't think Srila Prabhupada abandoned ISKCON. I think Srila Prabhupada was willing to continue his mission in ISKCON after his passing if the GBC was up to the task. Obviously, they were not. They were more concerned to divide the assets and replace Srila Prabhupada as the acharya of ISKCON.

That is your opinion. However, there was a big scholar from the Ramanuja sect that said that there is no shastric restrictions againt a ritvik system. Shastra has all sorts of prohibitions - does and don'ts. There is no "don't" concerning a ritvik system. The difference between a living ritvik system and a post-samadhi ritvik is an imaginary line drawn by devotees who think like you. However, their arbitrary drawing of the line is simply based on their conjecture that such a system cannot work post-samadhi. Srila Prabhupada already went beyond tradition with his living ritvik system. The step to a post-samadhi ritvik system is actually just one small step. It is not a quantum leap as far as I am concerned. Srila Prabhupada never mentioned any restrictions about continuing the ritvik system. If he was concerned about that then I am sure he would have made a point of it. He never expressed any concern that the ritvik system might be continued after his departure. In my view, no restriction against it opens up the door.

As if that would be a terrible thing. What is so wrong about people wanting Srila Prabhupada as their personal saviour? There is no shastric injunction against a ritvik system. It is not forbidden in shastra. Career ISKCON gurus don't like the idea because it would put them out of a job.

Can you prove that with shastric support?

I met Nirguna prabhu back in the late 70's. No doubt he is an outstanding disciple of Srila Prabhupada. I can only dream of meeting death as auspicioulsy as he is doing surrounded by loving devotees and having all facility for remembering Krishna. I will never be so fortunate and so blessed. Nirguna prabhu is a jewel of a soul and his death will be the beginning of a very auspicious new beginning. He is blessed and fortunate. Actually, I pray that he will pray for me, as he is destined for glory and I am so lowly. Praying for Nirguna? No. We should all be asking that he should pray for us. His destination is Cintamani-dhama.

In the Idealized ISKCON it is not a matter of serving an institution as much as it is serving senior devotees who govern a society of devotees organized for preaching and support. I'll be the first one to admit that the ISKCON of today is not the "idealized" ISKCON that ISKCON was under the direct presence of Srila Prabhupada. But, in principle, I don't have a problem with serving "an institution" if that institution is actually being managed by proper disciples of the acharya and doing so under his authority. It can get impersonal if we just wholesale reject all "institutions" without considering if the institution is propery guided by the orders of the acharya. ISKCON has failed the test as far as I am concerned and I don't consider that serving ISKCON in these days is tantamount to directly serving the acharya. But, in theory, I think the idea of serving the society of devotees is quite a good idea.

when the Yamadutas came after Ajamila, they were not asking "does he have formal diksha?" No, Ajamila chanted the name of the Lord and was saved. In the end, the formal diksha cannot save you and the lack thereof will not prohibit you from attaining liberation if you can remember the Lord and call his name at the time of leaving this body. When you see the light you will know what it is. When you see the Paramatama you will know who he is. As such, you will attain the goal. Non-devotees would see the light or the Supersoul as something terrible or dangerous. But, the devotees will recognise the Paramatma at death and surrender to him and be saved. That is the gift of Krishna consciousness in the innermost chambers of the heart.

Agreed. Diksha is not the formality. Diksha is something other than the formality. Diksha is the bringing into Krishna consciousness through instruction. I consider "uninitiatied devotees" like Theist and Ghari to be no less and even more qualified that some "initiated" devotees flaunting their formal ceremony as something more valuable and spiritually initiating that the vani of Srila Prabhupada. Agreed 100%. The formality is not real initiation. Real initiation is the indoctrination into Krishna consciousness that these devotees have received by taking the vani and siksha of Srila Prabhupada. The formal advocates sometimes consider their formal ceremony to make them more spiritual or more qualified than those without the formality. I don't buy into such externals. It's a phony front.

Sometimes devotees think that they become appointed guru by vox-populi. Many times this "vox-populi" is no more than one or two neophyte cronies looking to secure a position in whatever zone or area a senior devotee wields some influence or zonal authority. But, does vox-populi ever sanction a guru? How many Vaishnavas have accepted guru roles on the basis of vox-populi? Some would say that Srila Prabhupada became guru on the need of vox-populi. Some would say he was directly authorized and appointed by Srila Saraswati Thakur even though I personally do not know of any verifiable statements of Srila Saraswati Thakur where he explicitly ordered Srila Prabhupada to become a guru and accept disciples of his own. Whatever the case, I personally do not think that one or two ISKCON cronies petitioning some ISKCON devotee to accept them as disciples is really proper sanction, need or authority for an ISKCON devotee to assume the position of a diksha guru in ISKCON. It seems like that the senior sannyasis of ISKCON should and would be assuming the role of diksha guru before any junior ISKCON men come forward to become diksha gurus. But, because ISKCON observes no etiquette in regards to the seniority of the original sannyasi disciples of Srila Prabhupada, it's a free-for-all and any chump that manages to acquire one or two neophyte cronies to follow him is becoming a diksha guru in ISKCON.

Srila Sridhar Maharaja explains how and why the soul is actually more illuminating and powerful than the Sun. so, really, the soul is what allows us to see, not the Sun.

Aha! Another myth for the kiddies to promote. I actually thought you were better than that. Such childish tactics just show how desperate you are to defend the fairytale tellers.

Alright, you have all failed your Vedabase search challenge. Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 5.22 purport, The soul is MANY, MANY times more powerful than the Sun.

those are your opinions. but, you didn't make one shastric reference in your post. opinions don't mean anything. The living beings are qualitatively internal potency. Read the books and leave your opinions behind.