Gaurasundara

 

First of all I must say that I relish your comments, although they have almost no impact on...But over the time some changes in understanding can be seen in..., it will take some time to fructify, and of this there is no doubt.

 

 

Dear Anadiji, I am telling you this in a very friendly way, so please do not misunderstand or take offense. It is very very very important to have an open mind. Holding fast to certain things inhibits learning.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktivinoda's commentaries are not sastra, though their viewpoints are very interesting.

 

Taking into account Srila Bhaktivinoda's praNAma mantra, I would say that his Comments are in the category of Sastra.

 

 

Please allow me to clarify my original statement. What I meant to say, is that the commentaries of Vaishnava acharyas may be taken as 'sastra' by their own followers, and in certain cases, only by their disciples. Sri Vaishnavas, Madhva Vaishnavas, and so on, are not obliged to respect Gaudiya commentaries as sastra. For them it is not sastra, and for us their guru's commentaries ar enot sastra either, although they are respectable and worthy of attention, etc. So in that way, Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktivinoda's commentaries are certainly sastra for their own respective lineages, but in another way it is not sastra.

 

Apart from that, if we are to respect the commentaries of our gurus as sastra, then what counts as the 'guru' in the triangular formation of guru-sadhu-sastra? For this reason, I'd have to say that referring to the guru's commentaries as "guru-vani" is a far safer bet than referring to them as 'sastra.'

 

 

My gurudeva says that he is considered as the seventh Gosvami (besides the Six of Vrindavana).

 

 

Dear Anadiji, do you know who was the first ever person to regard Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur as the Seventh Gosvami?

Yogananda spoke of it in his autobiography. I haven't heard of this idea as official doctine, though.

 

Ceylon of today was just a mountain in Tamil Nadu thousands of years ago. As the waters moved inland, it became submerged with the peak forming an island.

 

 

This would be very strange considering that I have been to Sri Lanka (or Ceylon) and the pilgrimage sites connected with Sita-devi still exist. The footprint of Hanuman is there.

 

Of course you want a guru like Srila Prabhupada! Who doesn't? Do you think Krishna is incapable of making that arrangement? He knows you better than you know yourself. If you make the effort, really make the effort, He can reciprocate as He sees fit. Don't you trust Him? If you don't trust Krishna, then take shelter of Nityananda Prabhu. He's easy. But you have to be sincere.

 

 

This is more or less what Gour Govinda Maharaja used to say. He said that if one cries for Krishna (real crying, not pretend crying) then Krishna will make all the arrangements for the crier to get a bona fide guru. It's like that saying I've heard; Krishna is simple for the simple, and crooked for the crooked.

 

?

I have met Sri Krsna-ksetra das on several occasions. I am surprised to read his letter and also very happy.

 

***However, Rupa Gosvami also specifically outlines two completely different paths to achieve the goal. These two paths are vaidhi-bhakti and raganuga-bhakti.

 

No it is misundrerstanding. First sadna bhakti, second raganuga. It is one path not two.

 

 

vaidhI rAgAnugA ceti sA dvidhA sAdhanAbhidhA || (brs 1.2.5)

 

“Practice is of two kinds, namely vaidhi and raganuga.”

 

vaidhI-rAgAnugA-mArga-bhedena parikIrtitaH |

dvividhaH khalu bhAvo’tra sAdhanAbhinivezajaH ||

 

“The paths of vaidhi and raganuga are known to be separate from each other. Engagement in these two forms of practice certainly awakens two distinct varieties of bhava.” - Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu 1.3.7

 

These are Srila Rupa Gosvami's words. If you kindly insist on maintaining your position, then you are obliged to present evidence.

 

By the way, what is sadhana-bhakti? There are two forms of sadhana-bhakti. These two forms are known as vaidhi-bhakti and raganuga-bhakti.

 

 

***They are two distinct paths, the practice of which will give rise to two completely different bhavas.

 

/images/graemlins/smile.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif Who teach you?

 

 

Rupa Gosvami.

 

 

Sadana it is worship vaicuntha then person go in forewer Goloka.

 

 

vidhi-bhaktye pArSada-dehe vaikuNThete yAya ||

 

“Through vidhi-bhakti, one will attain the form of an associate in Vaikuntha.” - CC Madhya 2.24.87

 

rAga-bhaktye vraje svayaM-bhagavAne pAya ||

 

“Through raga-bhakti, one will attain the Lord Himself in Vraja.” - CC Madhya 2.24.85

 

 

In BRS - "nobody not come for Me with out step in santa rasa".

 

 

Where does it say that in BRS, precisely?

 

 

It is material - "I am follow raganuga only", it is misunderstanding.

 

 

sakala jagate more kare vidhi-bhakti |

vidhi-bhaktye vraja-bhAva pAite nAhi zakti ||

aizvarya-jJAnete saba jagat mizrita |

aizvarya-zithila-preme nAhi mora prIta ||

 

“Everyone in this world worships Me through vidhi-bhakti. Vidhi-bhakti has no power for attaining the feelings of Vraja. The devotion of the world is mixed with knowledge of My divine prowess. I do not delight in love diluted with prowess.” - CC Adi 3.15-16

 

 

***Therefore why whould only gopi-lila be the sole subject of consideration. Discuss the whole of the tenth canto!

 

No 10 canto disscus many sabjects. First need understand BG as it is.

 

 

Dear Kailasa, my simple point was about why people are so paranoid about the Tenth Canto. There are 90 chapters in the Tenth Canto. Of these 90, only five deal with the rasa-lila or dealings with Gopis. The point here is that Srimad Visvanatha clearly states that reading of Krishna's lilas in Tenth Canto will give rise to raga. I find it incredibly queer, the paranoia that is caused whenever "Tenth Canto" is mentioned. There is a lot more to the Tenth Canto than just gopi-lila. And anyway:

 

ZRNvatAM sva-kathAH kRSNaH |

puNya-zravaNa-kIrtanaH ||

hRdy antaH stho hy abhadrANi |

vidhunoti suhRt satAm ||

 

"Sri Krsna, the Personality of Godhead, who is the Paramatma [supersoul] in everyone's heart and the benefactor of the truthful devotee, cleanses desire for material enjoyment from the heart of the devotee who has developed the urge to hear His messages, which are in themselves virtuous when properly heard and chanted." - SB 1.2.17

 

 

***As I said elsewhere, it may be your sat-guru who teaches in this way, but other sat-gurus teach in different ways.

 

No two ways. True guru teach sadana then raganuga. If guru teach raganuga first it is no true.

 

 

Unfortunaztely for you, Rupa Gosvami does not agree with your opinion. Would you propose that Rupa Gosvami is not a true guru?

 

I think you must first understand that raganuga-bhakti is a division of sadhana-bhakti itself. There is no "sadhana" and then "raganuga." Raganuga can mean sadhana for its practitioners. Vaidhi-bhakti-sadhana, raganuga-bhakti-sadhana, and so on. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura speaks a lot about this. Have you read the books of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura?

 

 

You not have qualification for raganuga? you? anadi and so on.

 

 

How would you know I have no qualification to practise raganuga? Speaking of which, what are the qualifications for raganuga, does anyone know?

 

rAgAtmikAika-niSThA ye vrajavAsi-janAdayaH |

teSAM bhAvAptaye lubdho bhaved atrAdhikAravAn || (brs 1.2.291)

 

“The very being of those who reside in Vraja is steeped in loving attachment. One who becomes greedy to attain feelings similar to theirs possesses eligibility.”

 

kRSNa-bhakti-rasa-bhAvita-matiH |

kriyatAM yadi kuto'pi labhyate ||

tatra laulyam api mUlyam ekalaM |

janma-koTi-sukRtair na labhyate || (Padyavali 14)

 

“Wherever that consciousness laden with rapturous loving feelings for Sri Krishna is available, from there it must be acquired. For that there is indeed only one price, greed, which cannot be attained through pious deeds even in millions of births.”

 

The only qualification necessary for the practice of raganuga-bhakti is the sacred greed to hear about the rAgAtmika-bhAva of the VrajavAsIs. No other qualification is necessary. This is the path outlined by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

 

 

SP commentary describe real raganuga.

 

 

This is your opinion. "Real raganuga" has already been described by Srila Rupa Gosvami in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu.

 

 

***The key to finding the "right" way is to research which way most closely follows the path chalked out by the Six Gosvamis.

 

Gosvamis it is madhurya - vipralamba - acintya bheda abheda tattva.

 

 

So? This is the path they have chalked out for Gaudiya sadhakas to follow. Are you proposing that one should not follow the Gosvamis? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

 

they meet Krisna - they never meet Krisna it is top spiritual life, in platform material it is no understand.

 

 

Why is it not to be understood on the material platform? Real spirituality cannot be attained on the material platform anyway, or can it? That is precisely why Sriman Mahaprabhu made His Holy Advent, so that the disillusioned souls of Kali-yuga may be able to find their way to His supreme abode by the light that He holds in His divine palms. He passed this light onto the Gosvamis. And the Gosvamis have adequately explained how one may reach the Vraja platform.

 

 

Gosvamis it is not sambhoga Krisna lila, it is ONLY PART they teachings.

 

 

Have you studied the works of the Gosvamis?

 

I'll be honest here and admit that I have also not completed studying the Gosvami literature myself. However, what little I do know, I am far more inclined to accept their opinion than yours.

 

 

***In which case, no Gosvami or guru has ever preached that rasa-lila is material, to my knowledge. Those who think that rasa-lila is material are those who take it so.

 

Rasa lila no material - you- material, needs know 9 canto - then go 10 canto. Then CC and ten you understand Gosvamis.

 

 

Dear Kailasa, thousands upon thousands have proceeded to read Bhagavad-gita, Srimad Bhagavatam and then Caitanya-caritamrta. Are you saying that all of these people have a clear idea of the Gosvami's conception?

 

Speaking of which, one deveotee recently "boasted" to me that she has read BG, SB, and is now reading CC. She was fully convinced about the sastric basis of the chanting of the holy name and was glorifying it very nicely. When I asked her what she thought of CC Adi Chapter 4, in which the reason for Mahaprabhu's advent is given as the propagation of raganuga-bhakti with nama-sankirtana as a side-effect, she didn't have a clue what I was talking about. For me, this was proof that one can simply read books without understanding what is actually written in them.

 

 

***Listen, let's try a little bit of logic. Srila Prabhupada was specifically adamant about the fact that Krishna's romantic pastimes are to be taken as the highest exchange of love that can ever be expressed, and that they are nothing whatsoever like the troublesome, tawdry dealings that take place in the material world. As long as you view these episodes with this high understanding, what obstacles exist?

 

In one case it is may go lift, in another case it may degradade. If person material he is do not listen this pastimes.

 

 

Thus, Jiva Gosvami says:

 

kintu rahasya-lIlA tu pauruSa-vikAravad indriyaiH pitR-putra-dAsa-bhAvaiz ca nopAsyA svIya-bhAva-virodhAt | rahasyatvaM ca tasyAH kvacid alpAMzena kvacit tu sarvAMzeneti jJeyam || (Bhakti-sandarbha 338)

 

“However, these secret sports are not to be worshiped by those who experience male transformations in their senses, or by those who are in the moods of father, son and servant, for it would be contrary to their moods. Confidentiality is understood according to the partial or complete touching of limbs.”

 

Therefore, only those who are likely to be disturbed by rasa-lila are disqualified from hearing. This does not mean that all are disqualified, though. I have dealt with all these issues before in other threads.

 

 

Logic do not needs in this questions, needs folloowing true guru-sastra.

 

 

The problem here is that your conclusions are against sadhu and sastra. Whether it is against your guru all depends on who is your guru. Who is your guru, by the way?

 

 

***OK thanks for clarifying that. Perhaps you could embark on a research trip to Sri Vrindavana-dhama or Sri Navadvipa-dhama and just see how many Gaudiya Vaishnavas exist who do not have Srila Prabhupada as their guru, and let me know what you find.

 

If they not have taste books SP, then they not has qualification. It is true.

 

 

Sorry Kailasa, but still I find these sorts of statements a tad arrogant and slightly bigoted. You're just gonna have to learn to deal with the fact that not everyone thinks that Srila Prabhupada is jagat-guru. Every disciple thinks that their own guru is jagat-guru. How many jagat-gurus are there? Rupa Gosvami never read Srila Prabhupada's books, are you saying he is not qualified?

 

 

Yes, about Ramanada ray me may disscuss, no problem.

 

 

Do you know who Ramananda Raya is in Vraja-lila?

 

 

Yopu reach demigods, then you reach VAICUNTHA, then - Goloka. BRAHMA-Madhava.

 

 

Dear Kailasa, I humbly suggest to you that you do not have a clear understanding of Gaudiya Vaishnava siddhanta.

 

 

Sorry Kailasa, but I do not agree. This is a very erratic statement and also very inflammatory. It is not correct of you to state that Tripurari Swami and the rest do not follow Srila Prabhupada.

 

He is know svarupa SP?

 

He is know mood SP?

 

He is know books SP?

 

He is stay in organisation SP?

 

He is work some in disciples SP - yes.

 

He is take SP like main guru? Or not?

 

SP kind any way, but sorry it is not DIRECT following. Pls I am take me bows TS, I am only question.

 

 

Perhaps you might like to put these questions to Tripurari Swami or the others directly, or at least ascertain the situation with their disciples. That would be a far better idea than prematurely declaring that these individuals do not follow Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

ISKCON is not the be-all and end-all for a very large amount of people, what to speak of Gaudoya Vaishnavas as a whole.

 

You do not know ISKCON, all gaudia in time go in ISKCON.

 

 

Dear Kailasa, I have been going to ISKCON since I was born. ISKCON was first incorporated in 1966. ISKCON did not exist at the time of Mahaprabhu, the Gosvamis, Narottama, Visvanatha, and so on. Therefore there are hundred of thousands of Gaudiyas who have never gone to ISKCON.

 

 

***In Gaura-lila they assumed the form of sadhakas

 

Sadhakas or raganugas?

 

 

Raganuga-sadhakas.

 

Of course, this is only apparent and not real. /images/graemlins/wink.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

 

***and were personally empowered by Mahaprabhu

 

Yes YOU mey empowered Caitanya Mahaprabhu if be follow.

 

 

Kailasa, this is a silly proposal. I cannot empower Mahaprabhu, that would be a most grievous blasphemy.

 

 

***Himself to elucidate the philosophy

 

Yes 1 st canto, 2 canto all.

 

 

No, the Gosvamis did not write Sriamd Bhagavatam. That was written by Srila Vyasadeva.

 

 

***Where does it say that in the sastras?

 

SP, SBT, i am may look for you. In 10 canto write this.

 

 

I asked you for sastric quotes. Srila Prabhupada's and Srila Bhaktivinoda's commentaries are not sastra, though their viewpoints are very interesting.

That previous post was by me, I forgot to log in.

No Priitaaji, you are not an oddball. Believe it or not, I have a very high respect and admiration for Srila Prabhupada's disciples such as yourself, and I am glad to read your posts all the time.

 

I understand what you mean about kirtana. I am not aware if people bow down or not according to their respect (or lack of it) but perhaps it may be due to a very crowded temple room. I'll have to admit that sometimes I have not been able to bow down during the prema-dhvani or other occasions simply because of a lack of room. In these cases I bow my head and hear the prema-dhvani, and hope Krsna will not be too offended at my not bowing down.

 

As long as Krsna knows that it is not convenient, lol!! /images/graemlins/smile.gif But sometimes I feel a little guilty, especially when I have to remain in a standing position due to some specific service, etc. I agree with what you say about Srila Prabhupada; I have also read a letter from him in which he says pretty much what you say; that one must bow for everything. I remember him specifically saying "there is no limit to bowing down."

 

Something I forgot to mention earlier; in Bhagavad-gita, Krishna says that offering obeisances is an austerity of the body. So hey! Is this some easy tapasya or what! All one needs to do is bow down out of respect! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Priitaaji, could you tell me more about the custom of knocking on the temple-room doors before entering? How did it originate, what did Prabhupada say about it, etc? I'd be most grateful.

Interestingly, Srila Prabhupada writes in NOD that one should try to come to the temple at least twice a day. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

These types of masterpieces of poetry were used to tell the story of the human soul by the poets like abdul latif. Now what was that about allah not being the lover?

 

 

Oh yes, Shah Abdul Latif. I am familiar with SAL because he was a Sufi poet/saint from Sindh, am I right?

 

In which case, Sufism is not considered by orthodox Muslims to be an authentic branch of Islam. They ridicule and denigrate it. Apart from that, I agree that the sentiment of "Lover-loved" may be present in Sufism to some extent, but can we agree that it is not as detailed as much as the gopi-bhava theology developed by several schools?

 

 

In Islam, Allah is to be feared and yes, it is dasya rasa only, but sometimes he can be viewed a a beloved and a friend as well as a master.

 

 

I have yet to see evidence from Qur`an or the Hadiths to backup the "bhavas" of beloved. I have seen dasya-rasa present, and within sakhya it is a sense of sambhrama-sakhya and not visrambha-sakhya.

 

Could you please lookup any evidence from Islamic sources about "beloved" bhavas, please?

 

***Tripurari Swami, BA Paramadvaiti, BG Narasingha, BB Vishnu, and others, are examples of those who do not work for Prabhupada's disciples, yet they are disciples of Prabhupada who are doing good service in their own missions and having considerable success thereof. Would you propose that all of these are "far" from Prabhupada?

 

They work for their own missions, because they do not follow SP. Yes they serve some for Prabhupada but far from Prabhupada. It is right.

 

 

Sorry Kailasa, but I do not agree. This is a very erratic statement and also very inflammatory. It is not correct of you to state that Tripurari Swami and the rest do not follow Srila Prabhupada.

 

You need to broaden your horizons a little. ISKCON is not the be-all and end-all for a very large amount of people, what to speak of Gaudoya Vaishnavas as a whole.

 

 

***When did the Gopis ever do any preaching whatsoever?

 

Rupa-Sanatana Gosvami, all folowers Lord Caitanya preaching whatsoever.

 

 

Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis were not gopis in Gaura-lila. They are gopis in Vraja-lila. In Gaura-lila they assumed the form of sadhakas and were personally empowered by Mahaprabhu Himself to elucidate the philosophy and propagate it. Three guesses what they preached.

 

 

***Well, the fact is that all Gaudiya branches consider second initiation to be the most important one as far as I know.

 

It is no principial - kiba shudra, kiba nyasi.

 

 

What does the 'kiba vipra' verse have to do with first or second initiation. Kailasa, you have quoted incorrect evidence. The 'kiba vipra' verse is related to who is qualified to be a guru, not whether second initiation is important.

 

 

If some not brahman - it is no has big problem. If you not has first initiation - then you not has nothing. Right?

 

 

According to what I have been hearing from non-ISKCON sources, harinama initiation is considered a blessing to begin chanting, while the actual initiation is second initiation. I believe that Narayana Maharaja has this same understanding, am I right? Anadiji?

 

 

***Srila Prabhupada himself stated so in a letter.

 

I am ansver on this questions before.

 

 

OK sorry, but I have not seen what you said then. Please reply again please, and also please try to explain in coherent English language. I know you have difficulty with English, but please try to be clear as possible.

 

 

***By the way, what's your opinion about the soul's fall?

 

Soul fall from spiritual world.

 

 

Where does it say that in the sastras?

 

 

It material conception - "soul grow in material world".

 

 

It is not a material conception. The sastras specifically state that the the soul's bondage is "beginningless." No attempt is made to trace out the soul's origin, which is why it is considered beginningless. So it is of no use to say they were created in the material world, because:

 

a - they were not created

b - there is no proof

 

There is no use of saying that the soul fell from the spiritual world because:

 

a - it is untrue

b - there is no proof

 

It is SCIENCE. Spiritual life progress gradually. If you speak about gopis, then you very vell understand most "low" principles. If person not understand "low" principles, then he is no has qualification speak about gopis.

 

 

Spiritual life certainly progresses gradually, especially as noted along the lines of Rupa Gosvami's "adau sraddha" text. However, Rupa Gosvami also specifically outlines two completely different paths to achieve the goal. These two paths are vaidhi-bhakti and raganuga-bhakti. They are two distinct paths, the practice of which will give rise to two completely different bhavas. SB 10.33.39 proves that hearing of the sports of Krishna will clear the heart of all obstacles, become sober and attain pure devotion.

 

By the way, what makes you think that gopi-bhava is the only subject worth speaking of? Srimad Visvanatha Cakravarti writes:

 

rAgo'tra zrI mUrter darzanAd dazama skandhIya tat tal lIlA zravaNAc ca bhajana lobhaH - "The word rAga can be used when one's worship is prompted by sacred greed after seeing the beautiful deity of the Lord or by hearing about His pastimes in the tenth canto of Zrimad BhAgavata."

 

Therefore why whould only gopi-lila be the sole subject of consideration. Discuss the whole of the tenth canto! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

 

Sat guru teach in THIS way. If you guru preach in first "rasa" it is no autoritative, it is material.

 

 

As I said elsewhere, it may be your sat-guru who teaches in this way, but other sat-gurus teach in different ways. The key to finding the "right" way is to research which way most closely follows the path chalked out by the Six Gosvamis. In which case, no Gosvami or guru has ever preached that rasa-lila is material, to my knowledge. Those who think that rasa-lila is material are those who take it so.

 

Listen, let's try a little bit of logic. Srila Prabhupada was specifically adamant about the fact that Krishna's romantic pastimes are to be taken as the highest exchange of love that can ever be expressed, and that they are nothing whatsoever like the troublesome, tawdry dealings that take place in the material world. As long as you view these episodes with this high understanding, what obstacles exist?

 

 

***By the way, there is no law that one cannot advance if one does not follow Srila Prabhupada.

 

I am not see examples.

 

 

OK thanks for clarifying that. Perhaps you could embark on a research trip to Sri Vrindavana-dhama or Sri Navadvipa-dhama and just see how many Gaudiya Vaishnavas exist who do not have Srila Prabhupada as their guru, and let me know what you find.

 

 

Lord Caitanya NEVER do not disscuss abiut gopis. If some in level Ramananda Raya - then disscuss.

 

 

The point here is that Mahaprabhu did discuss the subject of gopi-lila with Ramananda Raya. Using capitals will not change the facts. The Ramananda-samvada is one of the most inspiring and important sections of CC. And Srila Prabhupada's view of it is nicely expressed in the quote posted earlier from TLC.

 

 

Vipralambha this gift. He is no speak about gopis only with qalification man. Only. Vipralambha most esotheri really, but Lord caitanya distribute her with out discrimination.

 

 

On one hand you are saying that Mahaprabhu spoke about gopis with only qualified devotees, and on the other hand you are saying that Mahaprabhu distributed vipralambha-bhava without dicrimination. Do you know what vipralambha-bhava is?

 

 

Pfilosopi Madhvacaria it is step in spiritual life, if person in level vaicuntha, then one is understand this pfilosophi. Then - Goloka. Then - Brahma - Madhava, with out philosopi Madhva all is sahajiya.

 

 

Madhvacharya's philosophy (and Ramanuja's, for that matter) are good examples of vaidhi-bhakti. By following vaidhi-bhakti, you reach Vaikuntha. By following raganuga-bhakti, you reach Goloka. This is stated in CC, it is not sahajiya philosophy.

 

 

If person no has big realisation but has small vigyana it is good. No needs "big realisation" teoretical, best small realisation but real - vigyan.

 

 

Yes, and how do you attain vijnana if you do not study and practise?

 

And let's not forget the principle of worshipping the guru-parampara - now it's more fashionable to simultaneously praise Prabhupada while rejecting his parampra as a "fabrication." Many standards are decaying.... it's very unfortunate.

 

 

Trying to stir things up? I hope you are aware that everyone is entitled to their opinions.

 

What I mean is, it does not follow that because one must have diksa, and that diksa enlightens one with transcendental knowledge, that therefore the process of "initiation" will enlighten you with transcendental knowledge. Unless of course, the "initiation" does satisfy the description of "diksa" give above.

 

This is obvious, since there are many individuals who have initiations which they might even refer to as "diksa," but who do not manifest symptoms of transcendental enlightenment.

 

 

I would put that down to insincere bhajana or offenses. Otherwise, assuming that the initiate is a serious and sincere practitioner, there should be no reason why the diksa should not work. After all, receiving mantras in parampara that have been "empowered" by Mahaprabhu Himself as well as handed down by all the previous gurus has got to be worth something! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

 

Not any initiation will do - only that initiation which actually gives the divine knowledge and thus counts as diksa.

 

 

Well, the general point of diksa is to receive the empowered sacred gayatri mantras, and the meaning of these mantras may be explained by the guru. Or else there will be descriptions of them in the various paddhatis. The interesting issue, I feel, is how the combination of letters in each gayatri-mantra is set in such a way that they have an effect on our consciousness. That itself may generate a very deep and knowledgeable discussion on the properties of mantra-siddhi.

 

 

There are many Hindus who receive initiation into gayatri mantra based purely on hereditary claim, even though they are otherwise engaged in purely materialistic pursuits. These individuals do not automatically have divine knowledge merely because they are initiated.

 

 

Which gayatri-mantra are we referring to here? The Brahma-gayatri? This may enforce my preivous point; why should the gayatri-mantra work for a sadhaka who is obviously insincere in his practice?

 

 

Indeed, without divine knowledge, the initiation process is just a formal shell of its intended self. That initiation in which divine knowledge is passed on is what is truly diksa. But probably I am just saying what is already understood by all.

 

 

Sure, but what "divine knowledge" are we talking about here? Jiva Gosvami explains divya-jnana as knowledge of the true nature of the Lord in the mantra and, by that, knowledge of one's own special relationship with Him. Did you know that each mantra can bring about a specific pastime? As well as enlightening us with "transcendental knowledge" about the Lord, the mantra will also effect transcendental knowledge about our own specific relationship with Him. Isn't this great? /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

Please explain what else you might mean by "transcendental knowledge."

 

By the way, I am expressing my views on what initiation means in the Gaudiya sampradaya. I am not speaking of diksa as a whole. Just to clarify.

Dear Muralidharji,

 

I am aware that you have presented all of these examples before.

 

Help them join Christ at Christ-loka, along with the many others from different corners of this universe.

 

 

Very nice post, Theistji, but can I ask why you are making propaganda for Jesus Christ? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

Just joking.

It has been the custom since Srila Prabhupada's manifest presence to bow down when entering or leaving the temple room, even if one enters only for a minute.

 

However, I have noticed that this standard is starting to fall. Devotees now satisfy themselves with nodding their heads if not just touching the floor with their hands, with no thought if it pleases Srila Prabhupada or the Deities.

 

This can be understandable, since sometimes there is a need to place or remove heavy objects in the temple room, but that is not an excuse to fall back on standards simply because of laziness.

 

Just my opinion, and my regrets.

 

what I don't understand is why this 'formal' initiation? ... The way I see diksa is from older times we had to create some kind of artificial community and by giving diksa you were bound to that guru. It is the same now ... Like I said I beleive in siksa, but diksa is something I feel only works with the intricate nature of trying to fit in some community ... That's simply my humble opinion, and may go to hell for that opinion, but that is the way I am now. I hope I didn't offend anyone by wondering about diksa like this.

 

 

I'm not initiated yself so I cannot speak from experience, but I'd also like to offer my opinion. What you say about fitting into a "community" is very true in one sense. Even if someone is going to school, they cannot just go into school and plonk themselves on a chair but they will have to be enrolledfirst. I think the 'formality' of diksa is something like enrollment. If one wishes to take knowledge from a guru, one must be 'enrolled' into his 'school' before one can be accepted as his student.

 

Aside from that, let's remember that diksa is a spiritual process with a spiritual aim, the aim of reaching Sri Krishna Himself! The mantras one receives has to be received from a bona fide guru in disciplic succession, otherwise they won't work. This is also something to be compared to school; the knowledge one gets from a school is authorised because your school is 'authorised' by the Board of Education, or something. I trust you will see numerous advertisements in comic books or newspapers advertising degrees and diplomas which will ultimately mean nothing. Are these schools guaranteed to give a proper education, or would it be better to go to an 'official' school in which education is guaranteed?

How do you feel now, Truptiji?

 

You are a human being, you have an evolved brain. Why do you think that you become less intelligent if you eat the animals?

 

 

Several scientific studies abound that show that the types of food that are eaten have a significant effect on the body, mind and behaviour.

 

Besides this, does it not bother meat-eaters that they are eating a dead body, cooked at that?

 

Ain't my sort of cuisine! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

 

For example, the sufi(inspired by the notions of bhakthi from hinduism) poets also put greater emphasis on personal devotion to God like the Bhakthi Yogis.

 

 

I studied this a while ago, the similarities between bhakti and Sufism. I ultimately came to the conclusion that they are not similar in terms of the goal, but they are certainly similar in attitudes and some practices. Ultimately the difference may matter, as Bhakti-yogis (Gaudiyas anyway) have a personal conception of God to aspire to, while Sufis maintain that God is ultimately a formless entity that is meant for us to merge into and become "one" with. This is a loaded subject and different Sufi orders may say different things, but they are all similar in that they maintain a certain sense of "oneness" is necessary.

 

 

So does prabhupada. Mohammed supports the idea that we are the servants of Allah, so does prabhupada.

 

 

However, Srila Prabhupada explained that "service" may be performed in five ways. In my studies of Islam, I concluded that Islam is basically on the dasya-rasa platform with some subtle hints of sakhya-rasa. I do not think modern-day Muslims would agree to the ideas of being the parents or lovers of 'Allah.'

 

But Islam and Christianity preach that the animals in nature are for humans to enjoy. They are made by God for man to enjoy and they do not have the same rights as humans do because they are less intelligent.

 

 

Where in the Qur`an does it say this? Made for man to enjoy?

I fully agree! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

In another place He is write - "first initiation it ALL, NO NEED second initiation." I am has this citation.

 

 

Quote it then, please.

 

 

Needs some brain for understanding all contecst books SP.

 

 

Well, the fact is that all Gaudiya branches consider second initiation to be the most important one as far as I know. Srila Prabhupada himself stated so in a letter. If you have a quote from Srila Prabhupada stating the opposite, then please produce it. I don't think it is fascinating to present an argument based on a quote you say you have.

 

By the way, what's your opinion about the soul's fall?

 

If you work for PRABHUPADA and HIS disciples, then you may connect with Prabhupada. If you serve in OTHER place you then far from Prabhupada.

 

 

Tripurari Swami, BA Paramadvaiti, BG Narasingha, BB Vishnu, and others, are examples of those who do not work for Prabhupada's disciples, yet they are disciples of Prabhupada who are doing good service in their own missions and having considerable success thereof. Would you propose that all of these are "far" from Prabhupada?

 

 

All gopis do raganuga-preaching.

 

 

When did the Gopis ever do any preaching whatsoever?

 

Then no need read about gopis ( 10 canto). This material understanding.

 

 

Awfully sorry, but I do not think you are in any position to tell other people what to do or judge whether their understandings are material or so on. "Judge not lest ye be judged," good advice.

 

 

But meet personnaly gopis? Meet personnaly Krisna? /images/graemlins/smile.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

 

What sort of standard is this? Because I have never met Krishna or anyone else, I have no authority to speak about Them? Have you ever met Srila Prabhupada? Yes? No? If not, then you have no authority to speak about him since you never met him. It is ridiculous to say that.

 

 

Need follow SP and do this step by step.

 

 

It may be necessary for you to follow Srila Prabhupada, but I am not initiated by anyone so I am in a position to take instruction from any guru who is inspirational for my spiritual life.

 

By the way, there is no law that one cannot advance if one does not follow Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Needs understanding sastra step by step.

 

 

Sure. Sraddha, sadhu-sanga, bhajana-kriya. You first have faith, then you associate with devotees, then you start practising yourself. And so on.

 

 

Lord Caitanya NEVER do not disscuss abiut gopis. If some in level Ramananda Raya - then disscuss.

 

 

Really? And here's me thinking that Mahaprabhu was very magnanimous enough to give His supreme gift to everyone regardless of qualification, even to those who were inimical to it.

 

 

If you may bath yong girl for Krisna - then disscuss. If you girl, then for you it is no problem. /images/graemlins/smile.gif /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

 

Apa-siddhanta. Why is raganuga-bhakti not a problem for me if I am a female but it is a problem if I am male? "You are not the body." This is the first basic lesson. It is foolish to suggest that one is enabled to follow a cerain path based on gender or any other mundane qualification.

 

 

Has manjari and has very small manjari.

 

 

Can you kindly explain to us the difference between a manjari and a "very small manjari"?

 

 

Learn about material world, then read CC. First read BG AND FOLLOW BG, second read SB gradually, and then read CC.

 

 

And what makes you so sure that I have not read BG, SB and all? Speaking of which, are you in any position whatsoever to tell people what they can or cannot do?