stonehearted

Oh how nice.

Another "Prabhupada said" for the books that there is no documented evidence for.

No, we don't have it on tape (but we know how easily that can be manipulated--ever listen to the "appointment tapes" with really good audio equipment?) or in a book (who would write such a thing in one of his books, and if he did, it would just be another thing to roast the editors for). But I've known the woman from whom this statement came for over 40 years. This story hasn't changed one letter in those 40 years. We also have to note that such a statement is corroborated by his comments on Harsarani's poem, as well as by elevated sadhus such as Srila Sridhara Maharaja and Srila Puri Maharaja. It's not an isolated piece of evidence but part of a very sweet picture.

Prabhupada didn't reveal his svarupa.

I'd contend that he left a trail of hints. (Actually, not only would I contend so, but I have, haven't I?)

He told me in a dream to ask Subal Sakha because he knows.

And you don't see that as a BIG hint? I also have to say that he has been a bit more explicit in other devotees' "dreams."

I haven't yet had a chance to talk with Subal Sakha.

Anyway I'm sick of hearing about the Cowboys! As far as I am concerned they are no longer America's team. Jerry Jones is becoming like another Al Davis. I'm not a Steelers fan but they have won more Super Bowls than the Cowboys, so cease and desist with the Cowboys or I shall be compelled to order a Fatwa. And remember this thread is not closed until the Fat Lady sings!!! How about them Dolphins!!!

You callin' dolphins fat? You don't want to do that with surfers around here. That's right: surfing cowboys! I don't think you want to mess with us, beggar boy!

Actually, the UF Gators have done pretty darned well, especially with Tebow around. God, have you seen the Gainesville area? There's so much blue and orange you could throw up.

Anyway, back in cowboy loka . . .

 

 

 

Looks like a cowboy to me.......

Me, too. I was actually avoiding making the same remark Sukhada did: even though I know devotees interested in sakhya-bhava, I don't know anyone--aside from Srila Prabhupada--whose interest is stronger than Tripurari Maharaja's. And you should see him with the cows!

I don't know if I've mentioned this here before, but the devotees used to make cowboy shirts for Srila Prabhupada. We even had some in the old Honolulu brahmachari ashram in '70 and '71.

I'm not sure/ I may be lost in the land of double negatives. Perhaps, professor Babhru will give us a definitive answer. Wait a minute; how come I can't get the Beach Boy's Barbara Ann out of my head? Ba ba ba, ba ba Babhru...

GAAAAHHHH!!!!! That's just an indication of how contaminating my company is. When devotees meet or see most other devotees they hear songs by Bhaktivinoda Thakura, or Narottama das Thakura. When they see me, they think of some awful Beach Boys song. And that started the day after I was initiated. Balabhadra was the first to sing . . .

Now, bear in mind that what I am about to say is not necessarily my opinion but something that I see will inevitably be raised in question of the book.

 

Some people will say that Babhru is just the front man for a campaign by Tripurari Maharaja to prove that Srila Prabhupada is in sakhya-rasa and that for developing madhurya-rasa one will need siksha from a guru in the madhurya-rasa.

 

In this way, Tripurari Maharaja will attract ISKCON devotess away from ISKCON to his camp where they can get madhurya-rasa from Tripurari Maharaja who imbibed madhurya-rasa from his siksha guru Sridhar Maharaja.

 

They will also say that the reason behind posting the booklet on the forum was for the sake of making such propaganda and attracting devotees away from ISKCON to the madhurya-rasa camp of Tripurari Maharaja.

Where the heck is the rotflmao emoticon here? This is the wackiest, most off-base response I could imagine. Anyone who has read much of Tripurari Maharaja's writing can see how this would be the response on Opposite Day. And anyone who would infer anything like this would be dead wrong. I don't think there's more to say that's appropriate in public, except that they should go back and see if they can discern the tone in his remarks about sakhya bhava.

I'm almost glad you brought this up, because it would sure never have occurred to me!

Okay, okay--Sukhada posted that note from Narasimha Maharaja in response to SY's wondering out loud how he might respond. I didn't post that, or the couple of other notes I had from him, because I hadn't yet asked for permission to do so. (If he had posted a comment on the page, which he says he intends to do today or tomorrow, I would have shared that.) Apparently Sukhada has that permission. In any case, this is certainly not the kind of controversy I'd like to see in this thread? In this thread I'd prefer that we move on to topics more related to the content and intention of the booklet. Anyone interested in pursuing the history of the problems between two of our missions is certainly free to do so on another thread. (Yeah, someone's going to chime in that I need to be realistic about the culture of AF. What's new?)

In the booklet ch.5 page 43 it says:

 

 

That is true, but is that notion confirmed by any higher authority or alternative authority such as Sridhar Maharaja?

 

If there is evidence that Sridhar Maharaja declared Srila Prabhupada as a nitya-siddha from Vaikuntha, wouldn't that be more authoritative than the opinions of his own followers?

 

Of course his followers will think that, but is that confirmed by senior Gaudiya authority?

 

And if Srila Prabhupada cannot be confirmed as nitya-siddha by senior Gaudiya authorities, doesn't that put somewhat of a hole in some of your conclusions and theories?

I present it strictly as the subjective perspective of his disciples. I don't assert it categorically, so it doesn't need to be proven. Some readers will find my analysis convincing, whereas others will not. I didn't write this to make converts. Rather, I wrote it to glorify Srila Prabhupada, to explore the breadth of what our sampradaya has to offer, and to give heart to those who, in their spiritual maturity, may not find themselves excited about approaching their eternal inner life as, as you have put it sometimes, preadolescent girls. Nowhere do I present my argument as airtight and exclusive of any other perspective.

so, that applies to everyone except Srila Prabhupada who was more inclined to the gopa-jana?

 

It's clear to me from the context that gopi-jana is a generic term for the residents of Vrindavan, at least here.

Despite some talk to the contrary, in my years in ISKCON there seemed to be almost a wholesale tendency towards madhurya-rasa by most all the disciples of Srila Prabhupada I ever knew, including some rough and tough guys that you would never imagine embracing the concept of madhurya-rasa with Krsna.

 

So, how is it that a guru in sakhya-rasa produced thousands of disciples aspiring for madhurya-rasa with Krsna?

 

That is the mystery to me that just is not answered with a conclusion of Srila Prabhupada being in sakhya-rasa with Krsna.

 

Even the most course and crude devotees guys I ever knew were internally aspiring towards madhurya-rasa with Krishna.

 

So, a guru in sakhya-rasa accomplished that?

I find it a bit incredible.

I address that, too. We have evidence of this happening going back to Syamananda Prabhu. Perhaps a more interesting question (which I don't examine in the booklet) is how a sampradaya that started with several lines of sakhya-rasa gurus became, according to some, exclusively for madhurya-bhava.

In Jaiva Dharma we see one guru instructing two disciples who have different bhavas. It's not new. It may be extraordinary, but it's sure not new.

So, were the madhurya-rasa mantras of Srila Prabhupada's diksha somehow ineffective on him?

Despite the entire parampara and all the diksha mantras leading to madhurya-rasa, Srila Prabhupada is somehow an exception?

I address that in the booklet, at least with regard to the Gopala mantra.

Maybe some are solidly convinced of the sakhya-rasa of Srila Prabhupada, but I am still setting on the fence.

Ouch!

Srila Prabhupada's father's name was Gour Mohan De. If you'd like to find out a little about him, you might enjoy reading the first few chapters of Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita.

Neither would I suggest that Srila Prabupada is directly Visnu tattva. Rather we are to see guru tattva as more akin to sakti tattva. As we know saktyavesa of Nityananda Prabhu means a jiva who is empowered with the sakti of Nityananda. Once it was brought up to Srila Sridhar Maharaja that Srila Prabhupada made one statement which is on an audio recording from Bombay, maybe 1975, where Srila Prabhupada debates with his Indian doctor friend who plays 'the Devils advocate'. The debate is over whether or not a person can have good qualities without being a bhakta. Srila Prabhupada is preaching similar to this excerpt from Srila Prabhupada Arrives in London, 9-11-69:

 

When his friend insists that there are good men, Srila Prabhupada says, "show me a good man, show me a good man, and I will kick on his face, I am so strong!"

 

When Srila Sridhar Maharaja heard this he chuckled and told that this is similar to a statement by Srila Vrndavana das Thakur in Caitanya Bhagavat.

He explained that Srila Prabhupada being empowered by Sri Nityananada had entered into the mood of Sri Balaramaji. So there was a connection between the saktyavesa and the mood displayed.

Nice. Of course, I discuss this a little in the booklet.

Sonic:Atul Krsna dasa then succinctly proved that Srila Prabhupada never preached nor is he in the opinion that the jiva fell from Goloka Vrndavana. After his talk, Srila Narayana Maharaja announced:

 

"I want preachers like this prabhu. He summarized everything I have taught about your Prabhupada. He did not speak about mangos and kachoris. He has preached that the jiva did not come from Goloka Vrndavana and that your Srila Prabhupada is not in sakhya-rasa but that he is a follower of Srila Rupa Gosvami and Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvami. You should all preach in this spirit. Try to have this bold spirit of preaching."

If I'm not mistaken, this Atul Krishna, having left Harikesh (?) for Narayana Maharaja, later left NM for Ananta das babaji (to be then known as Madhavananda das). More recently he left Adb to become some sort of Buddhist bhikku, and now is just a self-described vagabond named Ananda wandering around Asia. Ah, well.

Anyway, I'd be grateful for any posts responding to the substance of the booklet.

Tripurari Maharaja and I have both gotten very positive responses from Narasimha Maharaja. He first worried that the booklet may generate unnecessary controversy. But he decided that he likes it enough that, if we were to get it printed, he would see that it's distributed widely, including at Radha-Damodara temple. His comments were very encouraging, to say the least.

Thanks for taking the trouble to straighten that out, Sukhada. I thought about writing to ask him, too, but I don't like to bother him. I think anyone who has any questions about his history or his ideas will find him straightforward in his responses.

Now, if there is more discussion of the substance of the booklet, let's go!

I wonder if he [Narasimha maharaja] ever follows this forum.

It's a rather harsh arena at times.

I have no doubt that he has never visited this board. And rather harsh is a bit euphemistic, I think. Even this thread, meant for glorifying Srila Prabhupada, has degenerated into silly, 7th-grade name calling. If we can't discuss this topic civilly, I'll ask the admin to close it.

Granted that "wandering through the forest with Krishna all day, running here and there, rolling in the pastures, etc." is firm evidence of sakhya rasa.

Well, there you go. I'm not engaged in any speculation here. I'm just following the evidence, and it's the realization of Srila Sridhara Maharaja, who is a realized soul and close associate of Srila Prabhupada's throughout their lives as disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, that this is indeed, along with the other evidence he cites, as well as the other evidence I present in my little booklet, of an affinity for sakhya bhava. If there's real evidence of something different, let's bring it out and drink the nectar of the katha of our divine master's lila and charitra.

But just like Nityananda Prabhu, who is Baladeva Himself, there is also a representation in madhurya rasa, just as Baladeva is represented as Ananga Manjari.

Would you suggest, then, that Srila Prabhupada is directly Nityananda Prabhu, or Baladeva? I wouldn't. I remember the stir that such suggestions caused around ISKCON in 1970--and I was living in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, as far away from land as anyone can get!

Just because I am putting this forth does not mean that I have any personal conception of being in any rasa. Srila Sridhar Maharaja would say, "High talks, mad talks, who are we?" Then to purify from any offense he would chant, Nitai Gaura Hari bol and Dayal Nitai. He would sometimes say, "we must be careful not to disturb the higher quarter."

Therefore, there's no chance of entering the pastimes of Sri Sri Radha Krishna in Vrindavan without first attaining the mercy of Sri Nityananda Balarama, whose lotus feet are as soothing as the rays of millions of moons. Dayal Nitai, Dayal Nitai, Nitai-Gaura Haribol!

I'm waiting to see Narasimha Maharaja's response to this article.

Sure, it's a village culture, and everyone knows everyone else; everyone is someone's cousin. Life was like that on the Big Island. But where are the pastimes of the manjaris wandering through the forest with Krishna all day, running here and there, rolling in the pastures, etc.? That just isn't consonant with the manjaris' character. Nor is approaching Krishna directly in any case.

Or even Madhumangal:

 

Kṛṣṇa had one brāhmaṇa friend whose name was Madhumańgala. This boy would joke by playing the part of a greedy brāhmaṇa. Whenever the friends ate, he would eat more than all others, especially laḍḍus, of which he was very fond. Then after eating more laḍḍus than anyone else, Madhumańgala would still not be satisfied, and he would say to Kṛṣṇa, "If You give me one more laḍḍu, then I shall be pleased to give You my blessings so that Your friend Rādhārāṇī will be very much pleased with You."

Oh, yeah! There seems to be a bit of Madhumangala in Srila Prabhupada's repeated entreaties to his disciples: If you give me laddus and kachauris, then I will bless you! However, as I pointed out, part jokingly, Madhumangala's deal with Krishna might have been more straightforward: bring me some laddus and kachauris, and I'll put a word in with Radharani.

And I'll tell you this: I'm a pretty sophisticated reader, and I have always seen in Prabhupada's descriptions of Madhumangala's antics a special delight.

Brother?

Isn't Balarama the brother of Krishna?

Nityananda the same Lord Balaram?

 

So, if Prabhupada was shaktyavesha of Nityananda, then referring to Krishna as "brother" and telling him "you will get lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon you", seems to be a strong indicator that Sridhar Maharaja was right about him being shaktyvesha of Nityananda and this little song by Prabhupada seems to show that.

 

Sridhar Maharaja said that shaktyavesha means that the Lord actually enters into the heart of the devotee and does his deeds.

 

So, if Nityananda had descended as an avatar into the heart of Srila Prabhupada, then of course some sakhya-rasa sentiments would be prominent in the person of Srila Prabhupada at that time.

 

So, Prabhupada refers to Krishna as "brother" and teases him about getting lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon him.

 

Sounds like something only Lord Balaram could say.

Actually, Baladeva would probably be a little shy about discussing such a thing. It's said that when Balarama, going up a path on Govardhana, sees sparkley dust, he thinks that Radharani must be with Krishna, and, out of shyness, He turns around, not wanting to intrude. The same is true when Radharani sees sparkley dust; She thinks that Balarama must be with Krishna, so She turns around out of shyness.

It sounds, as I point out, more like Subal, who often gives Krishna advice about His romantic life.

Bhai means brother, but guys often call each other Brother, or, in the US, Buddy.

The crux of the matter is if Srila Prabhupada is a sakha and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati is a manjari, what hope do you have of manipulating your position in eternal Lila? Manipulation is a product of exploitation, which is vehemently disposed of by our Gaudiya Parampara in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

There's no question of such manipulation. It is in fact the polar opposite of our real position, which is to accept our essential identity as Krishna's eternal servant.

In a sense, even if this booklet is wrong, it is still the right thing to preach, since it will shake up the belief that we can manipulate ourselves into Lila. It has the potential to encourage Saranagati which looks towards descending Grace.

Bingo! What we see in both the prayers Srila Prabhupada wrote on the Jaladuta is saranagati in the extreme. Srila Jiva Goswami says in Bhakti-sandarbha (I think it's Bhakti-sandarbha) that of the six angas of saranagati, goptrtve-varanam (acceptance of Krishna as our sole maintainer) is the svarupa lakshana, the core principle. And in these prayers Srila Prabhupada expresses his utter dependence on Krishna. What a glorious example! And I can tell you that considering all this evidence together has enlivened me in my attempt at surrender. It would only be through such surrender that any interest in Srila Prabhupada's, or my own, inner life would make any sense.

I haven't written this to encourage any of us to contemplate our own navels, but to see how broad the Krishna consciousness movement is, how magnanimous Mahaprabhu and Nityananda Prabhu--and Srila Prabhupada--are, and to encourage us to share that gift with others.

Also consider how Srila Sridhar Maharaja a corrected the English translation of this verse of a poem by Srila Prabhupada aboard the Jaladutta:

 

krsna taba punya habe bhai

e−punya koribe jabe radharani khusi habe

dhruva ati boli toma tai

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brothers, you will obtain your good fortune from the Supreme Lord Krsna only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that it should be changed to read:

 

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brother, Sri Krsna you will obtain your good fortune only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Calling Krsna brother, seems to indicate some sakhya relation, or does it since a madhurya, Rupanuga - Radha dasyam idea seems to be given? So it was in this context the madhurya questions were asked about Srila Prabhupada's rasa, not that the Gopi Bhava Club had suddenly shown up.

Srila Prabhupada called that song "Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Krishna." The entire song is a direct address to Krishna, including that opening stanza. Srila Sridhara Maharaja certainly understood Bengali better than Jayascinandana, and the same goes for the several native Bengalis I've asked about that line. The verdict has been unanimous: that bhai is singular. The plural is different. And that bhai addresses Krishna, as does everything in the poem.

What we see is that Srila Prabhupada, in utter humility, sees himself as unfit to carry out the task given him. It is, after all, enormous, unthinkable. No one had done it; even those sent by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati to England in the '30s had very limited success. So he makes a bargain with Krishna, whom he sees as his friend (the manjaris aren't going to roll in the pastures and chase cows with Krishna): my gurudeva gave me this order, and I clearly cannot pull it off on my own. But if you help me, then I'll certainly succeed, and, by implication, my gurudeva may put in a good word for you to Radharani, so you will become fortunate.

With this clear understanding, the nature of the song becomes quite clear, it seems to me.