Bhaktavasya

I just finished reading this thread, and this particular post stikes me as an example of sectarian, us and them, thinking. Anyone who has understood Chaitanya's teachings through Bhaktivinode Thakhur also understands not only the universality of those teachings, that the branches and sub-branches of the Chaityanya Tree are 'too innumerable to count', and that 'offering respects to all others, without desiring any for oneself' doesn't mean you put everyone and anyone who has chanted the divine names of Nitai-Gaura, Radhe-Syama, in the same catagory and boat as some individuals who may have exploited those names (as well as the 'bonefide' Hare Krishna maha mantra) for self-aggrandizment, or without 'fully understanding' what and who those names represent. The later being hardly a transgression, as Mahaprabhu emphasized 'no hard and fast rules' for chanting. The guru or teacher is successful when the student/disciple graduates and understands that he/she can look around with a clearer vision and accept this, choose that. One eventually sees the self as master (according to SB) and goes on to help others do the same.

Yes, good work, Peter prabhu! Thankyou for the morning inspiration.

Dear Leyh; Right you are, thank you for pointing that out (the implication that only those 'cultivating a spiritual life' are capable of loving. In retrospect, the opposite effect has often been the case, proving that it is very poosible to remain in 'material consciousness' while being a spiritual practitioner. Likewise, even atheists and non-practioners of any religion or path have, as you say, performed acts of great compassion and selflessness because of love for another being or for humankind (and sometimes just because it's the right thing to do). Gaura-bhakta-vrnda!

May I first of all, may I submit that it would be more correct to say that there is no love in material consciousness, but for those who are cultivating a spiritual life, spiritual consciousness, there is indeed love between 2 humans. Now the question is does this 70 year old man have at least deep affection and compassion for this woman and if so why can't he help her in her predicament without making marriage a prerequisite. I believe that neither of them will be satisfied or at peace with themselves if it is more of a material arrangement than a mutually loving relationship. Although it is very difficult to struggle with paying bills constantly (which I can relate to with personal experience), it is (in my opinion) better to be alone in this world and have no one but Krishna at the end of the day to 'take your troubles to' than to make a compromise with the hopes that life will become a little bit easier (once the money problems are solved) when in fact a whole new set of problems arise. She may become resentful that she has to pay attention to this man, (especially if he insists on amourous attention and she has no love or attraction for him). Because she is young, I would advise her to wait and maybe Krishna (knowing the heart's desire) may bring a nice devotionally inclined man into her life to help her share life's burdens as well as the joys.

Someone (perhaps Jijaji or Jagat) may recall the specifics more accurately, but approximately 10 years ago there was something called the Jesus Seminar, where a group of Christian theologians attempted (through computer analysis that dated specific parts of the bible) to find out which passages in the bible were (more accurately) the words of Jesus and which sayings were added on much later by the Church. The results of their findings were that that specific quote (I am the only way, the truth and the light) could not have been spoken by Jesus during his time on Earth. This makes a lot of sense, as that one quote did more to divide people of faith (in the God of their choice) than to bring people together under the common banner of Love, tolerance and acceptance (of those of different faiths).

After reading this thread 2 days ago, I got a maha-headache, the likes of which I get once every few years. Eventually my entire body was in pain, and I just have to say (at the risk of getting cyber-yelled at) that whether Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati was initiated through the medium of a picture, a dream or another human doesn't matter to me. Also, whether 'we' are 'supposed to' wear white, orange, rainbow, or stripes is all external, the same with shaving the head, wearing no tilok or the design of your choice, positioning pictures of your gurus or teachers in order or having no pictures... and personally, many have been angry at 'Dad' (SP) and grand-dad (SBSS), but due to their efforts we are all having these conversations, and slagging them too much is still hateful and hurtful to those who owe them gratitude. Enough, already.

my reply: Richard Nixon was a British bhakta who was decalred a saint? please speak truthfull, Satyaraj.

By this logic no-one should post anything about anyone, and (at the risk of being confrontational) just who are you, Bhakta Shakta, to say that the person posting 'doesn't have the slightest appreciation' of what he is posting? Sounds like you're trying to muddy up the pure, pristine waters here.

I just discovered this forum, and personally, I find it a breath of fresh air and haven't yet come across any big put-down of anyone's guru or any other personality. WE have the right to speak out against anyone who is manipulating the truth in an obvious blatant way as we have learned the hard way the danger of tolerating 'gurus' and leaders who have almost destroyed the fragile faith of trusting devotees. As someone (SP) once said, 'speak 99% about how wonderful the spiritual world is and 1% about how terrible the material world (cheating world) is.

Respectful pranams to you, Jijaji. I have printed out some of your excellent posts and will savour the contents throughout today. (and no, I'm not following you around; I just picked up the scent of Nectar and there you were/are)