Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kulapavana


    I think sambya is right..


    Bliss is the only measuring tool.


    The sadhaka feels bilss even before the visions appear,thus it is understood he is advancing.Also humility goes hand in hand with this bliss.If someone calls the advancing devotee a pig,he hardly cares.If such a state comes,know that you are advancing.


    The true gurudeva is immersed in bliss always.


    The spiritual movements can never be success..not over a long time...Time introduces people to the movement..who don't even attain bhakti before the Gurudeva departs.


    Althought these disciples are good at heart,they haven't realisd the truth.The movement inevitably fails.


    Very good analysis.

    Are religious institutions bound to fail after their founding guru departs? I think they are more likely to fail if the founder acharya does not create a clear succession plan, and a properly working administrative body before he departs.


    what if the shisya is already quite advanced ? but then again finding a guru is predestined and direct manifestation of god's will. so any well advanced shishya would never find a worthless guru . circumstances would automatically drw him to someone genuine and powerfull in spiritual world !


    That is very true. Spiritually advanced people are rarely attracted to cheaters.


    My spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada, cited this verse as the standard for measuring spiritual progress:

    bhaktih paresanubhavo viraktir


    anyatra caisa trika eka-kalah


    prapadyamanasya yathasnatah syus


    tustih pustih ksud-apayo 'nu-ghasam



    Devotion, direct experience of the Supreme Lord, and detachment from other things -- these three occur simultaneously for one who has taken shelter of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the same way that pleasure, nourishment and relief from hunger come simultaneously and increasingly, with each bite, for a person engaged in eating. (SB 11.2.42)


    Good one, Babhru-ji! Thanks!


    excellent sambya
    I second that :)


    What we need is more specifics...


    For example, if we see that trully fallen people become truly and sustainably purified by following a particular process, than that process can be seen as effective.


    If out of thousands of sincere followers only one becomes a pure devotee, that is not such a great success, as some people are already quite advanced when taking shelter of a particular guru. The same can be said about a particular way of sadhana - such things need to work for a lot of people to be considered valid and worthy of further of propagation.


    Success/Failure are materialistic terms used by materialists as an yardstick to measure material things. I do not think if we can use it to measure anything spiritual.




    yunjann evam sadatmanam

    yogi niyata-manasah

    santim nirvana-paramam

    mat-samstham adhigacchati


    "By meditating in this manner, always controlling the body, mind and activities, the mystic transcendentalist attains to the kingdom of God through cessation of material existence." (Bg. 6.15)


    Prabhupada writes in his purport to 6th Chapter: "Thus carefully controlling his mind, the successful yogi engages his mind, body and his self in Krishna's service. A true yogi is a sannyasi, who is unattached to the fruits of his work, not one who performs no work."


    Statements like that can be seen as speaking in terms of success/failure in regards to spiritual topics.

  6. Pranams...


    How do we verify success in spiritual life?


    When is a disciple a success?

    When is a guru a success?

    When is a spiritual movement a success?

    When is your spiritual life a success?

    When is a particular spiritual practice a success?


    It seems easy to cover up just about any failure with complex philosophical excuses. But will a child like person buy such explanations?


    Does Krsna seem closer to you today than He was 5 or 15 years ago? Are you making progress? Are you less attached to material concepts and posessions? Do you treat others like they were really spirit souls, parts and parcels of Krsna?


    I would like to hear your reflections in this area.

  7. After 2012 there is of course the dreaded 2013! ;)


    Scam artists have been writing best selling books about this 'end of days' scenario since ancient times. They tend to belong to one particular tribe, that has been peddling pseudo religious hysteria since ancient times.




    I have colitis with mucus and flatulence, due to this there is pain in abdomen and stomach upper part. How should I control gas element? Due to pain sometime I become hyper. I also have acidity so everything attacks me. Any auyurved mild medicine which I can take without medical supervision.


    Thanks for your help :smash:


    You may want to also try some anti-parasitic herbal formulas.


    But why do people concentrate on this instead of his divines grace teachings.

    And why do you blame prabhupada for all this


    And where do you see me blaming Prabhupada for the myths his disciples created?


    There are things in Prabhupada's teachings which are absolute in nature, but there are also things which are relative and subject to practical validation. In other words: some of Prabhupada's teachings are based on shastra and some are based on his opinion.


    interesting may i ask what you and kulpavana have been hearing about these myths.


    These myths are quite common in Iskcon circles. Here is one example: http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/06-09/editorials4581.htm

    Some of Prabhupada's disciples think that there is no need for the sastra, because whatever their guru said is more important than sastra. There is no need to pay attention to the sadhus as well. Just like there is no need to observe the rules established by their guru's guru (Srila Bhaktisiddhanta).


    Such disciples are nothing but a guru-cult grouppies.


    With these words you give me back some faith in Bhaktivedanta Swami which I lose otherwise hearing his other disciples. Thanks.


    You are welcome.


    Srila Prabhupada had his own vision of Krsna consciousness and his own approach to training his disciples, many of whom were really low class people with huge egos. He sacrificed a LOT when he came to NY from Vrindavan. The eventual success of his mission was a very, very significant development which in many ways shaped Prabhupada's message and practical approach. I think he actually wanted to develop a new world religion based on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, rather than simply stick to GV itself. This is something that perhaps goes back to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta.


    You have to look at Srila Prabhupada with your own eyes. Simply rejecting the myth his fanatical disciples are trying to force on everybody is only part of the picture. The core of his teachings is very solid, and his methods are mostly effective. But there is a lot of stuff on the edges that is very debatable, very controversial, and often very ineffective. Some of his disciples developed into very nice advanced devotees, while others developed into obnoxious and ignorant fanatics and guru-groupies. So ultimately it is a somewhat mixed picture but certainly the primary tone is very positive.

  12. SB 1.9.43sūta uvāca

    kṛṣṇa evaḿ bhagavati


    ātmany ātmānam āveśya

    so 'ntaḥśvāsa upāramat


    sūtaḥ uvācaSūta Gosvāmī said; kṛṣṇe — Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead; evam — only; bhagavati — unto Him; manaḥ — with mind; vāk — speech; dṛṣṭi — sight; vṛttibhiḥ — activities; ātmani — unto the Supersoul; ātmānam — the living being; āveśya — having merged in; saḥhe; antaḥ-śvāsaḥ — inhaling; upāramat — became silent.


    Sūta Gosvāmī said: Thus Bhīṣmadeva merged himself in the Supersoul, Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, with his mind, speech, sight and actions, and thus he became silent, and his breathing stopped.


    The stage attained by Bhīṣmadeva while quitting his material body is called nirvikalpa-samādhi because he merged his self into thinking of the Lord and his mind into remembering His different activities. He chanted the glories of the Lord, and by his sight he began to see the Lord personally present before him, and thus all his activities became concentrated upon the Lord without deviation. This is the highest stage of perfection, and it is possible for everyone to attain this stage by practice of devotional service.


    not very good.

    But cant expect better from you whos trying to defame prabhupada


    The good qualities of Prabhupada are self evident to any sane person. There is no need to invent imaginary glories by fabricating myths about him like his disciples often do. But you cant expect better from those who turned Gaudiya Vaishnavism into an updated guru personality cult of karta-bhajas.


    and thousand thanks to krishna for giving you the eyes to love him without hating others.


    Yes, I am very grateful for receiving so many great gifts from Krsna. Initially I approached Him for knowledge. Over the years I have received that, and much, much more.


    The ability to appreciate others is a true mature fruit of spiritual knowledge, because you realize how they are all dear to Krsna, and how we are all part of the same river of being flowing from Krsna. That is monism, and perfect realization of it makes you a great soul.


    sorry , but this purport is simply false !



    I see it as a case of over-emphasis on dvaita understanding, out of fear that his disciples might venture too far into the modern versions of monism. Compromising the truth to tell a useful tale. Prabhupada did that quite often.


    However, there comes a time when a child no longer believes in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. I do not blame Prabhupada for sometimes telling his disciples fairy tales. I blame his adult disciples for clinging to these fairy tales as aif they were the absolute truth.

  16. SB 4.7.38

    yogeśvarā ūcuḥ

    preyān na te 'nyo 'sty amutas tvayi prabho

    viśvātmanīkṣen na pṛthag ya ātmanaḥ

    athāpi bhaktyeśa tayopadhāvatām

    ananya-vṛttyānugṛhāṇa vatsala


    yoga-īśvarāḥ — the great mystics; ūcuḥ — said; preyān — very dear; na — not; te — of You; anyaḥ — another; asti — there is; amutaḥ — from that; tvayiin You; prabho — dear Lord; viśva-ātmaniin the Supersoul of all living entities; īkṣet — see; na — not; pṛthak — different; yaḥ — who; ātmanaḥ — the living entities; atha apiso much more; bhaktyā — with devotion; īśaO Lord; tayā — with it; upadhāvatām — of those who worship; ananya-vṛttyā — unfailing; anugṛhāṇa — favor; vatsalaO favorable Lord.


    The great mystics said: Dear Lord, persons who see You as nondifferent from themselves, knowing that You are the Supersoul of all living entities, are certainly very, very dear to You. You are very favorable toward those who engage in devotional service, accepting You as the Lord and themselves as the servants. By Your mercy, You are always inclined in their favor.


    It is indicated in this verse that the monists and the great mystics know the Supreme Personality of Godhead as one. This oneness is not the misunderstanding that a living entity is equal in every respect to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This monism is based on pure knowledge as described and confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (7.17): priyo hi jñānino 'tyartham ahaḿ sa ca mama priyaḥ. The Lord says that those who are advanced in transcendental knowledge and know the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness are very dear to Him, and He also is very dear to them.



    SB 1.4.4

    tasya putro mahā-yogī

    sama-dṛń nirvikalpakaḥ

    ekānta-matir unnidro

    gūḍho mūḍha iveyate

    tasya — his; putraḥ — son; mahā-yogī — a great devotee; sama-dṛk —

    equibalanced; nirvikalpakaḥ — absolute monist; ekānta-matiḥ — fixed in monism or

    oneness of mind; unnidraḥ — surpassed nescience; gūḍhaḥ — not exposed; mūḍhaḥ

    — stunted; iva — like; iyate — appears like.


    His [Vyāsadeva's] son was a great devotee, an equibalanced monist, whose mind was always concentrated in monism. He was transcendental to mundane activities, but being unexposed, he appeared like an ignorant person.


  18. First of all, you have to look at the translation of this verse, BG 13.34.

    yathā prakāśayaty ekaḥ

    kṛtsnaḿ lokam imaḿ raviḥ

    kṣetraḿ kṣetrī tathā kṛtsnaḿ

    prakāśayati bhārata


    yathāas; prakāśayati — illuminates; ekaḥ — one; kṛtsnam — the whole; lokam — universe; imam — this; raviḥ — sun; kṣetram — this body; kṣetrī — the soul; tathā — similarly; kṛtsnam — all; prakāśayati — illuminates; bhārataO son of Bharata.


    The word 'lokam' simply means 'this world' or 'this place', refering not necesarily to Brahmanda, but to our earthly realm.


    examples of translation of this word: http://vedabase.net/l/lokam

  19. Posted by Sonic Yogi

    Prabhupada didn't authorize him to give diksha.

    He appointed him a ritvik.

    Your claim that Prabhupada authorized him to give diksha is a lie.




    Too bad he did not make it abundently clear in a way accessible to all newcomers.


    He handpicked the team that was supposed to carry on his work and authorized these people to initiate. Now you ritviks lay the blame on 'naive newcomers' duped by the people Prabhupada picked as leaders. Do you think any of us in the late 70's would have taken initiation from anybody unless they were authorized by Prabhupada?


    Tell me please, which coach does not bear any responsibility for the way the team he handpicked plays the game? In your ritvik theories you have divorced yourself from the reality, because it is much easier for you to lay the blame only on the players, and those who got played.


    I do not need a guru who takes zero responsibility for the disciples he supposedly trained. I do not think Srila Prabhupada was like that, and all I have written here is actually meant to show you how idiotic and inconsistent the ritvik theories are.


    Actually, most of the disciples he chose to be gurus were sincere. They were just inexperienced and immature and eventually they got corrupted by the power and opulence they had accepted.

  20. If you have a problem with him acting as a guru in those days, blame the person who gave him that position. If it was not for Prabhupada's authorization, I would not have taken diksa from him.


    You ritviks have a very selective memory, remembering only that part of the chicken that lays eggs for you.

  • Create New...