stonehearted

Well, it's too damned bad so many devotees don't see it as their life to encourage others to chant Hare Krishna. We've seen many signs here that you don't care much for what ISKCON folks say about so many things; why worry about what they say about this? To heck with 'em! Go for it! Srila Prabhupada's line was "Chant Hare Krishna, and your life will be sublime." Chant and be happy. Too many of your posts here sound like they come from an unhappy person, and now we know why. It doesn't have to be that way. The key to spiritual progress is good association, devotees who are fixed in their practice, like minded, and affectionate. Do whatever you can to find such association, and don't worry about what anyone says. Another tip, if I may: You may find that Tripurari Maharaja's book Siksatakam of Sri Caitanya encourages you in your chanting, too. Be kind to yourself, dear friend.

Oh, that makes a lot of sense! Take down your "Proceed With Caution" sign and get happy again, for cryin' out loud. I mean, who were you following when you chanted--the sahajiyas, or Srila Prabhupada? (Yeah, it's a rhetorical question.)

I thought the context was this: If I'm mistaken, pardon me for intruding.

You may have Krsna Candra confused with Kailasa Candra. I don't think they're the same person. Kailasa Candra doesn't hang out on forums such as this one, as far as I know. He does his own thing in his own arena.

Latest report, from Cittahari das: The situation is looking good. The flames are moving very slowly, burning the dead fuel in the understory, which needs to happen to keep the forest healthy. The wind has been very favorable; there has been no smoke at Audarya since I arrived. Yesterday an engine from Cal Fire showed up and I told them about Vrindaranya's cabin. They have 1300 feet of hose and could reach it easily. He also said that the clearance around the buildings up on the ridge is very good; every fire crew I've talked to about that has said that the buildings on top are not problem to defend. So even if the wind picks up the buildings, even Vrinda's cabin, would most likely come through just fine. I talked to Robin Byrd, one of the locals who has done work at Audarya, and he said this particular fire has burned 8,000 acres. He has had 5 bulldozers working nonstop since Saturday. The community spirit here in Anderson Valley is amazing. People are really pulling together and helping each other out. Given the latest news and what I've seen so far I think Audarya will come out totally unscathed; if the backfire works (which it should, since the winds are very favorable) then I could see them having this fire contained by tonight. For now, we're resting up, and watching and waiting.

A note just posted by Gaurasundara: "a man from the logging company that owns the land just came by and said things were looking good. a lot of progress was made yesterday. they cut a fire line down the ridge on the left with a bulldozer as far as they could and are going to finish it by hand today. then they will start a back fire up the ridge to stop the one coming our way. the wind is in our favor."

Here's the most recent report I know of, from Nitaisundara: "About 6:30 here, fire has continued moving down, slowly. No word from fire dept yet today, we got decent sleep last night so we are feeling pretty good. tons of bhoga." The comment about good sleep is significant. The devotees there went three days with little more than cat naps. The neighbors' help, from the way it sounds, was nearly unbounded in its generosity and invaluable. The "tons of bhoga" was provided by a devotee who lives a few hours away, a veterinarian, I think, who drove to Audarya to help however she could. The staff at the ashram right now is only three devotees: Gaurasundara, a 30-year-old Canadian; Brajasundari, who has been Kula's source, a 40-year-old Polish woman; and Nitaisundara, a 20-year-old "second-generation" devotee, whose parents are Srila Prabhupada's disciples. They, as well as the devotees presently with Maharaja in Costa Rica, are wonderful devotees to visit, and even better to live and serve with. I can't wait until I can get back there. In the meantime, my fingers are still crossed.

If the devotees leave, they have a place to stay. Brahma das has an inn in nearby Philo. I think that's where the Deities are staying now.

The fire department called Audarya a little while ago. They said that the wind is picking up and that the fire will jump the creek. They figure they have about 12 hours. The devotees have cleared any brush near the temple and near Maharaja's quarters. They're working frantically now to clear brush around the cabin. The firefighters won't try to defend it because there's no road to it. And the other devotees' yurts . . . waddya gonna do?

My sense is that they're really busy there, doing whatever needs to be done to keep the fire away if it crosses the river. So I doubt that Braja has had a chance to get to her computer for a while. I'm in Alachua right now, recovering from wrecking my knee a few days after Gaura-purnima. I agree that the water supply can't be counted on for fighting the fire. There's some space between Maharaja's quarters and the trees; the same with the new temple. Plus, they have metal roofs, not cedar or redwood shakes. The building most at risk is Vrindaranya's cabin, which was built downslope and is surrounded by trees. I think the devotees' yurts are in danger, too.

I'll post any news when I can. My fingers are crossed (I can't get them into an Om--too old, I guess). The new temple and all the work of the devotees there over the last several years, including Maharaja's place and the cow barns, are at risk. And all my books and other possessions are there in my yurt right at the edge of the forest.

The fire is actually closer than it sounds. It's climbing down the ridge opposite Audarya, and if it get to the bottom and jumps the creek, it will climb up the hill really fast. The cows and Deities have been evacuated. The good news is that, last I saw, the fire had slowed down overnight, as they generally do, and Cal Fire expected to have a crew of firefighters on the site this morning. There was, at least a couple of hours ago, some reason to be optimistic.

I'm curious: what evidence do we have for this, especially as a universal statement. This may have been the case in some instances, but the jati-gosais didn't. I know that when brahmana Gaudiyas took vesa (which, until Srila Sarasvati Thakura, meant babaji vesa), they removed their sacred threads, but I think brahmanas who took diksa from other brahmana Gaudiya vaishnavas kept their sacred threads. Does anyone have some evidence either way?

All of Srila Prabhupada's small books except Easy Journey are put together with edited transcripts of lectures; PQPA is edited from some conversations. Would I give the small books the same weight as Srimad-Bhagavatam, Krishna book, Bhagavad-gita As It Is? No. Srila Prabhupada had those books created for mass distribution. I'm perfectly clear that, whatever imperfections one might find in them, they're acceptable to him for what they are. With specific regard to the two versions of the conversation between Srila Prabhupada and that French priest, would you prefer that it be included without any editing? I hate to be the one to break this to you, but editing is an essential element of writing and of publishing. Srila Prabhupada, as an experienced writer and publisher, showed his appreciation of that fact. If you're so excited about the stamps, Kula prabhu, why not spearhead--maybe even finance--an investigation? Would you be willing to support your assertion by naming your "several reliable sources," or are we compelled to accept it because you said so? No big deal--just asking.

No, I wouldn't rely much on the letters for siddhanta, depending on the situation. I think some letters may be more useful in this regard than others. I read a letter to a Godbrother in which Srila Prabhupada decried the whole "Prabhupada said" phenomenon as "another cheating." He further wrote, "If it is not in my books, I did not say it." The stamps? I can't say I know for sure--can you? And if you can, how? What--specifically--is your evidence? I actually held one in my hand, had it in my possession for a while. They weren't what you might think, or at least this one wasn't. It was not a rubber stamp made at a copy shop. It was metal, no handle, irregularly shaped. Perhaps it was from an offset plate or something. And don't think it didn't get my mind going. I was the same guy who, five or six years earlier, had real suspicions about the men running ISKCON, even the men traveling with Srila Prabhupada. I asked Upendra about them, and he didn't think there was anything particularly sinister about them. In any case, my spiritual life is rooted too deeply to be disturbed by these kinds of things. I have full confidence in Srila Prabhupada--confidence that has been tested.

Well, this is easy to say. I've heard it several times over the last 30-odd years, but rarely from anyone in whom I had explicit trust. This isn't a hard one at all. I asked him about it personally in 1973. I told him that some devotees didn't trust his letters because they didn't think he wrote them. He told me that his secretary read him the letters he received, he told them what to say in reply. Then he read the replies and made any corrections before he signed them. "If they don't trust my system," he told me, "they don't trust me." So as far as the style goes, it's generally either his secretaries' own style, or their style influenced by his in some way, or perhaps their attempt to sound like him. Does that mean there was no hanky-panky among his secretaries? Probably not. When I first met Srila Prabhupada in Honolulu in 1970, I had nagging suspicions of the men around him. And from what I've read about what was going on at the time, he had deep suspicions about some of his leaders. Nevertheless, he showed he was in control. Yeah, that sounds like a lovely way to throw someone's money away on "experts," as was done in the poison "investigations." Perhaps the biggest problem with the way things he said in the letters are used is taking them out of context. Another is giving the same weight to each and every statement. Each letter was written to a particular person in response to something they wrote, to something that happened, or both, in the context of certain other events. And each statement in each letter had a particular purpose, known best by him. Analysis of any text includes knowing about the author, the audience, and the author's purpose. Not everything in every letter should be taken as a general, absolute statement applicable to everyone who ever lived. Some were very personal, not meant for everyone to read. We ought to take into consideration everything we can understand about the context in order to really understand what he said in each letter.

Nicely said. This is the heart of sadhana. I've often asked if it isn't fun, what's the point? What I do doesn't have to be what you do. In the 11th Canto of the Bhagavatam we find a verse that Srila Bhaktivinoda often quotes that tells us real piety, real beauty means to know where you are and behave accordingly. So figure out what works for you and embrace it. That attitude will ensure real progress. Find devotees you like and trust and associate with them as much as possible. Find aspects of service that appeal to you and embrace them. Remember that you're an individual, with an individual relationship with Krishna. Move forward in realizing that relationship without fear. That's when the process becomes fun. So figure out where you are, what will help you progress, and embrace that, without feeling you need to compare yourself to anyone else. That's what we see in theist that makes us all like and respect him--his humility and candor.

What I mean by sadhana is the processes given by the acharyas and the spiritual master for uncovering the soul's inherent inclination to love Krishna. It's described in the scriptures, quite systematically in Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu and repeated in Lord Chaitanya's teachings to Sanatan Goswami in Madhya-lila of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, beginning with taking shelter of a spiritual master, inquiring from him about spiritual advancement, accepting initiation from him, serving him with faith and confidence, etc. There are 64 items of vaidhi-sadhana bhakti discussed, as well as process for raganuga-sadhana bhakti. And what do I mean by faith? Nothing different from what we hear from Mahaprabhu and the acharyas: conviction that by serving Krishna all other attainments are fulfilled. This is manifest practically by the six aspects of surrender discussed quite thoroughly by Bhaktivinoda Thakura.

Depending, I suppose, on what you mean by "practical" and "normal," you're right. If you mean living a workaday, tax-paying consumer's life, a dynamic sadhana can certainly mess up your plan. I've had a strong, steady sadhana for nearly 39 years. When I married more than 35 years ago, our idea was to go to South America and introduce Krishna consciousness to a country where devotees had never been, Peru. When ISKCON politics screwed that up, we went back to Honolulu and served as the head pujaris and later helped open the first Govinda's restaurant. We then moved to the Big Island, where we kept our sadhana, including mangala-arati, daily Deity dressing, Bhagavatam and Gita classes, and festivals for big days. Later I worked as a paralegal in Honolulu for a couple of years, maintaining our sadhana at home and doing service at the temple. However, after Srila Prabhupada's passing from our vision, I was inspired to start a gurukula in Honolulu and later to work at another in California. After leaving ISKCON at the end of 1985 (if you were around then, you could probably guess why), I kept up my sadhana as I worked, helped my wife raise our kids, and got a graduate degree. My sadhana increased while I worked--hard--teaching English at colleges and universities in California and Hawaii. I got a tenure-track position (not an easy thing to accomplish) while maintaining a progressively dynamic sadhana. I also had several strands of service to devotees going--and growing--at the same time. The problem is that this dynamic sadhana continually grew until I was no longer really able to channel the energy needed to grow my academic career. So at 60 I find myself not regularly employed, fairly useless for economic development, intersted mainly in growing my sadhana further and sharing Krishna consciousness, and moving out of family life. This can be somewhat disconcerting, of course, epecially for my wife and kids. It would have been even more disconcerting if I had become similarly useless 15 or 20 years ago, when my wife and kids depended on me more for their maintenance. This seems impractical if I see myself as a white man with English degrees who belongs to a particular little family. It's quite practical, though, if I see myself as someone whose purpose in life is to serve my guru and cultivate love for Krishna. The real question, I guess, is who are you, what do you want, what do you consider success?

Thanks, theist, for your eloquent response. There's a Bengali saying that Srila Krishna das Kaviraj quotes in the first chapter of Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita: mitam ca saram ca vaco hi vagmita. Real eloquence means to say what's essential concisely. The "minimum standard" is a little like the dealer's initial ploy: the first one's free. The fact is that Bhakti, being a person, is alive, dyanamic, not static. Once you let her in the door, she eventually takes over your life. Nice, eh?

Pretty flimsy spelling. The fact is that if these two quotations--the only record of his using that term--are analyzed critically (that means with discernment), it's clear that he tells us just whom he means by that term (which is what an appositive does). (I used to teach this kind of thing in colleges and universities for a living.) And the fact that he never even hinted that he was starting a new sampradaya, and, more to the point, asserted that his qualification is that he's serving one of the four sampradayas, show that this whole business is simply speculation, and flimsy (or, worse, filmsly) speculation at that. After all, no one can call himself a muni unless he has his own philosophy. You've bought in so solidly that you can't hear another point of view.

If you ignore the context for those two quotations, you'll miss the point Srila Prabhupada makes. Here's the first one, with the context that has been conveniently omitted in cbrahma's post: "So a human life should be engaged inquiring about the Absolute Truth, and he should inquire from a person who, who has heard about the Absolute Truth from a realized person. There is a.... Therefore it is called sruti, parampara, disciplic succession. One... Just like Vyasadeva is hearing from Narada. Narada is authorized. He has heard from Brahma. Brahma has heard from Krsna. So this is the parampara system, disciplic succession. So there are four parampara systems. They are known as, at the present moment, Ramanuja-sampradaya, Brahma-sampra..., Brahma-samprada..., yes, Madhva-sampradaya, Brahma-sampradaya, Madhva-sampradaya, the same, and Rudra-sampradaya and Sri-samp..., Sri, Rama, Kumara-sampradaya. These is four sampradayas. So we should hear from the sampradaya-acarya by disciplic succession. As Krsna recommends in this Bhagavad-gita: evam parampara-praptam imam rajarsayo viduh." This makes it clear just who he means by sampradaya-acharyas: those acharyas accepted as the heads of the four sampradayas. That's even more clearly stated in the second quotation cited, where, in the appositive phrase Srila Prabhupada defines the term: "the Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, Visnuswami and Nimbarka." These are the only two instances you'll find in the VedaBase where Srila Prabhupada uses that term. He never says, or even implies, or even obliquely hints, that he is a sampradaya acharya. He never says that he's starting a new sampradaya. He would never have said such a thing. The point he makes in these two places is that one must hear from an acharya who comes in one of these four disciplic successions. He said more times than can be easily counted that this is how he's genuine: he is following one of these four acharyas. On the other hand, one could make a case that Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu started His own sampradaya. But he didn't make that case Himself. I'm afraid that this idea of calling Srila Prabhupada a Sampradaya Acharya has no basis in what we've learned from Srila Prabhupada. It's based, no doubt, on a nice sentiment, but one which, left to get out of hand, leads to something like the kartabhajas' worship of the guru as God.

That's a rich one! I'll accept that challenge.

Thanks to both of you for your exemplary humility.

Just in case: