stonehearted

LOL. Yeah you know other similar couples but from the world I have lived in all such couples are like Big Islands, rare and solid. I'm now thinking of Brsni and Lila suki (was that her name?). Hope they are stil together and doing well.

Brishni and Leelasukhi (that's how Srila Prabhupada spelled it) are indeed still married. I spoke with them earlier this year. He's teaching at a community college in some God-forsaken place in California. I can't remember where right now. (But they still have their house outside Portland, Oregon.) They're not practicing Krishna consciousness so much any more, but they're solid people.

Sorry Babhru I got the wrong impression. My bad.

 

Yeah this is how I picture you and your wife. One of those solid and steady senior householder couples whose home is a natural temple. You know the village brahmana.

Oh, there's nothing to apologize for. In fact, I sometimes wondered myself about some of the same things you mentioned. On the Big Island, and even in San Diego, we sort of were like village brahmanas in many ways. Here, there are so many devotees who have been "fixed up" (still trying to figure what that really means) for so long, and many who have been married as long as we, or longer. The only thing weird about us is that we're from the Big Island. And probably that I won't be here much longer.

I keep wondering why, after all this time and experience,you keep putting yourself in that position in the first place Babhru? I see you as someone who should be giving lectures, developing and leading study courses different aspects of Krsna conscious shastra etc. quite independently of Iskcon or any other matha or scene. Not hearing the same old Iskcon line that you have seen beyond decades ago.

 

It's puzzling. Old friendships maybe?

Actually, I gave the lecture at that temple that morning. We were scheduled to return home to Hawaii the next morning, and I had never heard this particular godbrother speak before. And it was, after all, Srila Sarasvati Thakura's disappearance festival. I was sorry to have gone; should have spent the evening quietly with my wife and kids. I actually was on my way out the door--wasn't even going to stay for prasadam--when a friend got my attention and expressed his own dismay at what had just been said. At least I wasn't alone.

On the Big Island, I led a study group focusing on The Nectar of Devotion the last couple of years I was there. It was quite a wonderful experience. The only reason I stopped was that I left. And I haven't gotten anything like that going here because I've never intended to be here for very long. (Can't believe I'm still here.)

My relationship with ISKCON is complicated, often troubled, as some of you may have gathered. But that's not the main focus of my life any more, and hasn't been for quite a long time.

So, maybe we should all just buy into the doctrine that all the disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta except Srila Prabhupada were mayavadis?

 

Bhaktisiddhanta only had ONE real disciple and Srila Prabhupada has hundreds?

 

That is about what they are trying to say.

That's exactly what some of them are saying explicitly. A few years ago, on the occasion of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's tirobhava, I heard a lecture from an ISKCON leader--sannyasi, GBC member, and "initiating guru"--say explicitly that Srila Prabhupada was the only true disciple of Srila Sarasvati Thakura, and that all his other disciples (and that's the word he used: all) became Mayavadis and sahajiyas. His lecture was roundly applauded. I couldn't get out of the room and away from that place fast enough.

It is in the Memories book compiled by Siddhanta prabhu.

It isn't just gossip.

If it's in the Memories book, it's not reliable. It's devotees relating their memory of things Srila Prabhupada said, and memory is a very tricky thing. Just because it's in print doesn't mean it's true. So some might find this a nice thing, but we can't establish without any doubt that Srila Prabhupada said it. Nor is it particularly useful in developing our own love for Krishna. If you can find some way such imputed quotations are helpful for our spiritual progress, please let us know.

Yeah, tell that to Lance.

Oh, well--that proves it, then.

We never heard this story from Srila Prabhupada himself, but from the child's mother. What Srila Prabhupada liked was the child's innocent appreciation. He never--and that's never--instructed his disciples to call him "Swami Jesus" or to present him as such.

And the book you refer to is a sort of digest of Satsvarupa Maharaja's Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita. It's a nice book, but it has many inaccuracies.

Um, since that's a soccer ball (or football to non-Americans), it looks as though the good doctor is committing a foul (we hope not an offense).

I observe Ekadashi because it pleases Krishna, and it's a chance to remember Him a little more intensely than on other days. The gopis don't observe Ekadashi because it wouldn't please Krishna for them to go without something. Because we were trained to do so when I was young, I also chant more japa on Ekadashi than on other days.

I worry a lot less about what I can eat on Ekadashi; it seems as though I'm trying to figure out what I can get away with. Jeez--it's only one day.

That paragraph from Mantra 17 refers us to the previous verses. Did you read those? In the beginning of the purport to Mantra 16, Srila Prabhupada explains,

The sun and its rays are one and the same qualitatively. Similarly, the Lord and the living entities are one and the same in quality. The sun is one, but the molecules of the sun's rays are innumerable. The sun's rays constitute part of the sun, and the sun and its rays conjointly constitute the complete sun. Within the sun itself resides the sun-god, and similarly within the supreme spiritual planet, Goloka Vrndavana, from which the brahmajyoti effulgence is emanating, the Lord enjoys His eternal pastimes. . . .

In the first two sentences, Srila Prabhupada analogizes the sun with the Lord, and the sun's rays with the living entities. Then he analogizes the sun's rays with the brahmajyoti. This makes the living entities and the brahmajyoti appear logically identical. Because we're discussing subjects that are beyond the material energy, which, in a sense, precede the material energy, they're inherently adhokshaja, achintya. So, although we see that some logic can be used, it's being used in terms of figurative language--metaphors, similes, (perhaps most concretely) analogies. If we think of such things in terms of physical location, material time, etc., we are bound to err in our conclusions. Anyone who has studied even the basics of the branch of philosophy known as metaphysics should understand that when we talk of creation, as of the soul, we're not talking of their having been fabricated in a particular fashion, time, or place. We're talking about their origin. I have to pack it in with this; it's way past my bedtime.

I've discussed the changes rather extensively with Dravida (who was my neighbor when I lived in San Diego) and Jayadvaita Swami. They had some idea of trying to bring the books closer to Prabhupada's dictated versions, while improving the sentence structure, etc., for which I've seen Srila Prabhupada express his appreciation. (Don't try to drag me into arguing the book-change issue; that's one of the things I don't do.) I checked the 2003 VedaBase, which has a category for pre-1977 books; however, it has a 1974 version of Sri Isopanisad and the 1975 edition. No 1969 edition. (Odd, I thought.) I'd check my copy of the 1969 edition, but it's in a box in California. <sigh> <sigh></sigh>

This should all bring us back to the question that gives this thread its name: Where does the impersonal interpretation of tatastha-shakti come from? The answer is that it comes from those who want to vilify saintly devotees such as Srila Sridhar Maharaja and Srila B. P. Puri Maharaja. They never said that the tatastha-shakti is impersonal. It's us. Our personality may not be fully manifest when we're wound up in the body of Mahavishnu, but it unfolds as we practices sadhana bhakti in good association.

Tatastha is an adjective, not a place. And all this is discussion of something that's inherently beyond the ken of the mind and senses to comprehend or properly express--it's adhokshaja, achintya. And the sages we find in the shastras express their divine vision in poetic language, which is largely figurative.

And we conditioned souls who can't stay away from TV, Hershey bars, and others' wives think we can figure this out with our little minds? Forget it! (Oh, that's just what Srila Prabhupada said to do.)

Advice from Ishanah's booklet. Excellent! I've noticed that here in Alachua, Florida the Tulasis are all under some greenhouse stuff; they aren't allowed any direct sunlight for some reason. I haven't asked the lady in charge of Tulasi about it, but I've heard Mainland devotees worry about how dark Tulasi gets if she's put in the sun. Guess what? That's the way she's supposed to be.

When I met my wife almost 35 years ago, she was taking care of Tulasi in San Diego. She had her under grow-lights (it was winter in San Diego), and Tulasi looked fabulous. These were the healthiest Tulasis I had seen since leaving Hawaii. Maybe that's how it all happened . . .

My advice is based on almost 39 years' experience taking care of Tulasi-devi. I started in Honolulu in March of 1970. I was appointed by Goursundar and Govinda dasi to take care of the first Tulasis almost as soon as she sprouted. In other words, I'm the first person to care for Tulasi in ISKCON. This is not to toot my own horn, but to give you some idea of my experience.

Unless you're in the south of France, putting Tulasi outside in the winter is not an option. It will be too cold much of the time, and the days will be too short. If you have grow-lights, the kind folks who grow cannabis use, she should get ample light if you give her 12 hours or so a day. (I don't really have a lot of experience taking care of Tulasi in really cold places; I've lived in Hawaii and Southern California almost all my adult life. But this is pretty much what I've heard from those in cold climates.) If she doesn't do well, or if she's just too pale, you could consider giving her more light.

If she's potted and indoors, I wouldn't soak her soil every day. Soak it when it get pretty dry, maybe every second (or third) day. (But not longer.) Offer a couple of drops on the other days as part of your worship.

This is key: Give her proper nourishment. Replenish the nutrients in the soil regularly (every week or two) with a good all-purpose fertilizer. Organic fertilizers should be your first choice, but if you can only get something like

Miracle-Grow, then do use that.

Tulasi-devi has the form of a plant; service to her needs to meet her practical needs.

Even though this is not a spiritual opinion, and at the risk of becoming embroiled in yet another useless argument, I must point out that many of us saw beforehand that a full-blown invasion would be a terrible mistake. I remember being in the Hilo WalMart when the "Shock and Awe" bombing campaign began, and they played radio broadcast of the explosions over the PA. Ugh. It was horrible, insane.

Lordy, are you ever hopelessly naive . . .

Sri Kartamasayee was the most wonderful Lord, greeting all those who stumbled into the old manoa valley temple on McKinley. Always there, ready to accept all mangoes picked between UH campus and that wonderful temple (and there were millions of mangoes in that neighborhood, eh?)

He was the Deity on the altar when I first went to the temple, very early in 1970. (Before that I had just been going to feasts at Queen's Surf Park and chanting with the sankirtan party in Waikiki.) When I saw Him, it never occurred to me that this was idol worship. I immediately recognized that this was Krishna, and it was no surprise that the devotees worship Him. He was so-o-o-o beautiful! (Still is!)

Such a travelling Lord. Do you know the story of How He became the original Lord of SF? Better daze is a good thread if you know it.

Govinda told me, but I don't remember any details. I can check with her next time I speak with her.

That is brother Subal, isnt it? with the long hair shaking madly at the beginning?

The skinny dude? Yep! (He ain't skinny no moa'!)

Hare Krsana, hope all is well wit cha, yo brah, mahaksadasa

 

PS New school year?

For Satyaki, yes, here in Alachua. For me--well, I got nothin' goin' on, brah. I'm helping her get her business organized, looking forward to a new stage in my life. Mo' laytahs.

Bob

Babhru, where oh where is Sri Kartamasayee.

He's at Govinda dasi's house in Hauula. I got to spend time with Him whenever I went to Oahu on College business. I'd spend the night at Govinda's and worship my Thakurajis in her temple room in the morning, right next to The Boss.

At the risk of calling any more attention to myself, I want to make a correction to something I think I said in the class. When discussing Krishna das Kaviraja's comments about kaitava dharma as he explains the second verse, I think I said that it was the vastu nirdesa sloka. Actually, as Kaviraja Goswami says, the first two verses (vande gurun isa bhaktan, and vande sri krishna chaitanya nityananda suhoditau) constitute the namaskara part of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita's mangalacarana, which invokes the book's Deity. The vastu nirdesa (theis) is the verse beginning yad advaitam brahmopanisadi. The asirvada (blessing)verse is the fourth verse: anarpita-carim cirat karunayavatirnah kalau. . . .

Don't take it seriously, Kula. It was admittedly a throwaway question. I have no idea what it takes for someone to be considered a Pole. My family had been expoiting North America for almost 400 years, and I've only left the country four times in the last 60 years. I'm provincial, a bumpkin, compared to all you cosmopolitan world citizens. (Damn, am I starting to sound like Sparky?)

You cannot attain Vrindavan through sadhana.

It might be too easy for someone to attack this assertion because raganuga-bhakti is also a sadhana, and it is discussed in the sadhana-bhakti section of Bhaktirasamrita-sinhdu. Raganuga sadhana gives Braja-bhava, and that is the only means to attain Braja. This is something ISKCON devotees need to discuss thoroughly and carefully. Among the few who actually read The Nectar of Devotion, I've seen few of those go beyond Part 1.

No jews in Poland? (I guess not any more.)

So what would be the difference between Vasudeva Datta and Jesus Christ, assuming for argument's sake that JC did perform an act of universal karma-negation in being crucified?

 

None that I can see.