raga

June 2, 2002

Getting back to what appears to be the main concern over Radha Kund Babajis -- their toilet arrangements -- I sincerely believe that the Babajis were not the architects who designed the infrastructure of the Radha Kund village and its sewage arrangements. The toilet arrangements probably developed sometime after the beginning of the British rule, when Radha Kund began to be immigrated by people from elsewhere, and a need for structuring the city eventually came about, along with the septic tanks and the rest of the sewage system.

But what about siddha pranali and the teachings of Bhaktivinoda?

June 2, 2002

Originally posted by ram:

I do not remember the source. But there is one cassette that I heard briefly in my friend's house that talked about "link verses". These verses that were spoken and not recorded by Vyasa. From what you say there is no such conflict

Were they channeled by a visionary of later days, or how did they become known to the world? I've never heard of them before.

Or are they coming through the siksa-sampradaya of Arjuna? Posted Image

June 2, 2002

The BBT edition has the following number of verses (listed per chapter):

One -- 46

Two -- 72

Three -- 43

Four -- 42

Five -- 29

Six -- 47

Seven -- 30

Eight -- 28

Nine -- 34

Ten -- 42

Eleven -- 55

Twelve -- 20

Thirteen -- 35

Fourteen -- 27

Fifteen -- 20

Sixteen -- 24

Seventeen -- 28

Eighteen -- 78

----------------

TOTAL -- 700

I recall hearing a strange number of 712 back during my days in ISKCON. Probably someone miscounted the verses and told the number to others, who never bothered to check it themselves.

Where have you read of gaudiya acharyas listing more verses? Bhaktivedanta Swami based his commentary on the commentary of Baladeva, and had Baladeva commented on more verses, they would certainly have been included in BS:s edition.

I checked the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti edition, which included the commentary of Visvanatha and a synopsis of Bhaktivinoda's commentary. It has the same number, 700 verses.

June 2, 2002

I am also not in the line of Lalita Prasad, so cannot claim any membership in the LP club (unless of course they are handing out free CDs ).

We offer a free e-mail address for our members (Raganuga.Com Club). Our members can also access our 128kbps/160kbps mp3-archives upon request, whereas our downloads are only 96kbps for the public. Other goodies are to come.

Join the ranks -- gain the benefits. Support our cause.

June 2, 2002

I appreciate your grand expression, but please at least cut the row of zeros in smaller chunks, because otherwise the thread becomes impossible to read, since the texts all go half a meter outside the screen. Use the "Edit" button and amend the text accordingly. Thanks.

June 2, 2002

Your objections are of a very serious, profound nature. Radha Kund Babajis are bogus sahajiyas because there are alleged defects in their toilet arrangements (as if they were any different from anyone else's around there).

How did we forget about the discussion on siddha-pranali and the teachings of Bhaktivinoda? I thought that was one of the real issues. Strange.

June 2, 2002

Originally posted by Jagat:

You will find nothing about Radha and Krishna lila in the Veda. Nothing about sambandha, abhidheya and prayojan as we know it. There is no chanting of Hare Krishna, there is no deity worship.

Kali-santarana-upanishad of Krishna Yajur Veda? (5-6)

hare kRSNa hare kRSNa kRSNa kRSNa hare hare

hare rAma hare rAma rAma rAma hare hare

iti SoDazakaM nAmnAM kali-kalmaSa-nAzanaM

nAtaH parataropAyaH sarva-vedeSu dRzyate

Not? Well, I guess congregational chanting of the same is a different issue. When was this quoted for the first time, though, anyone knows?

June 2, 2002

Raga, I dont think the basic practices are clear.

The practices are very clear. Only we are faced with an underlying philosophical question, which is yet to be resolved.

My view in brief: The awareness of the soul is focused on matter. I draw this understanding from the following statements of the Gita (3.27, 15.7)

prakRteH kriyamANAni guNaiH karmANi sarvazaH

ahaGkAra-vimUDhAtmA kartAham iti manyate

mamaivAMzo jIva-loke jIva-bhUtaH sanAtanaH

manaH-SaSThAnIndriyANi prakRti-sthAni karSati

The soul's awareness is focused on matter due to his desire to enjoy matter. This awareness is diverted away from matter (the desire is changed) into an inquiry for its spiritual constitution upon tasting something which is of spirit by nature (such as the Holy Names of the Lord). I draw this understanding from the Gita (2.59):

viSayA vinivartante nirAhArasya dehinaH

rasa-varjaM raso 'py asya paraM dRSTvA nivartate

I understand this "paraM dRSTvA" to refer to an experience affecting the self, which comes in touch with its original spiritual nature. Atma is the source of awareness, and the mind and intelligence are components of prakriti, though having distinctive functions in manifesting awareness. Gita 7.4, 3.42:

bhUmir Apo 'nalo vAyuH khaM mano buddhir eva ca

ahaGkAra itIyaM me bhinnA prakRtir aSTadhA

indriyANi parANy Ahur indriyebhyaH paraM manaH

manasas tu parA buddhir yo buddheH paratas tu saH

Hence it is my understanding that the self (Atma) is the one from whom the desire ultimately comes. This desire can change. Gita proclaims the atma to be unchangeable:

nAsato vidyate bhAvo nAbhAvo vidyate sataH

ubhayor api dRSTo 'ntas tv anayos tattva-darzibhiH

From the surrounding verses, it is not very difficult to understand how this refers to the atma's not being affected by material changes. When I spoke of something affecting the soul, I did not refer to a material impetus, but to a spiritual impetus, such as the Holy Name and Vigraha of the Lord, which are eternally beyond matter -- and constitutionally of the same nature as the atma.

If anyone is under the impression that I have misunderstood the Gita, I would be very grateful if he could explain the subject matter thoroughly based on shruti-smriti.

By the way, much of the Gaudiya practices is drawn from Pancaratrika scriptures -- which are not shruti. Any learned soul may also wish to elaborate on the relationship of shruti and pancaratra.

June 2, 2002

The philosophical basis of the practices that you were advocating was that they have direct influence on the soul.

I said it umpteen times that niyama as we decided to outline it (according to Patanjali) is concerned with body/mind.

The question we are faced with is: "Is there anything which can directly influence the soul or its cognitive functions?"

I am not a master of shruti shastra, and consequently unable to draw the content directly from the Upanishads to explain the relationship of bondage between the soul and matter. I offered my view based on the Gita. I invited our pandits to explain the truth. I am still waiting.

June 2, 2002

quote:

--

The ecological problem is one that is everywhere in Vrindavan. It needs to be dealt with by people who know what they are doing.

--

Okay you can try to minimize it, but if they want the prestige of being the owners and mahants of the kunda then why aren't they taking leadership and initiative to solve the problems? They are taking in millions of dollars, yet there is nothing practical to show for in Radha Kunda seva, which is practically done by the brajabasi pandas.

I am yet to see the millions of dollars, when sometimes there is struggle to get funds together for publishing a book.

As you may have heard, all of Radha Kund and Shyama Kund is emptied on regular intervals, and the pond is cleansed, after which it is filled again by the natural springs on the bottom of the Kunda. This is coordinated by the sadhu community.

In April-May, a lot of slippery substance accumulates on the underwater steps of Radha Kund. The sadhus we see scrubbing it off to avoid the pilgrims slipping and hurting themselves.

Daily Radha Kund banks are washed with water. It is the sadhus along with one local brahmin devotee whom I see taking the buckets and cleaning the banks.

quote:

--

There have been conflicts between Babajis and Brajavasis over the ownership of the Kund. The Brijvasi Pandas claim ownership so they can make more money from it.

--

That's the crux of the problem, both claim ownership, but actually Radharani is the owner. No one wants to be a steward or a real manjari and clean it up. Internal manjari and external king.

I would rather not attribute faults to Raghunatha and Jiva Gosvamis for obtaining Radha Kund as their legal property. The certificate from the Muslim ruler is still available at Vrindavan Research Institute for everyone to see, as well as Jiva's will, where he testaments the Radha Kund property onwards to the next generation's representative.

Everyone wants ownership and the attendant profits to be earned, and the babajis are no exception to that. I am sure there are even ISKCON wallas who would like to get in on that action. Actually, I know there are such persons and they are being dealt with as well. I am not partial when it comes to rascals. But you would be incorrect if you conclude that the Brajabasis are heartless entrepanuers.

Speak not of the quarrels the local pandas have over the pilgrims who come over for a visit. Western pilgrims means big money. 11 KG rice for Radhakund seva, 11 KG for Shyamakund seva, 5 KG for milksweet-seva and donation for the pujari, and you end up paying Rs. 600 for the quick puja you never asked for, and would have preferred to do it in peace, not with all your luggage on the banks of the kunda, just coming from the airport without taking a shower. Not that everyone is like that, but for the most part it is big-time business there with the pilgrims.

Feel free to disagree, and of course, this is not meant to be a blanket statement about all babajis, there may be a good one out there I missed, and to the rest, if the shoe fits wear it.

Though you are in the mood to slander Ananta Das Pandit, you are yet to show any of your claims as true with any decent standard of evidence.

June 2, 2002

If you see Krishna then you will manifest the asta sattvika bhavas, if you do not it was your imagination.

According to Visvanatha's Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu-bindu (2.16):

<blockquote>kiJca bhaktAnAM cittAnusAreNa bhAvAnAM prAkaTya tAratamyaM bhavati. tatra kvacit samudravad gambhIra citte 'pi aprAkaTyam svalpa prAkaTyaM va. alpa khAtavattarala citte atizaya prAkaTyam ca bhavatIti nAyam Atyantika niyama iti prapaJco na likhitaH.

There are differences in the manifestation of bhava in accordance with the psychological nature of the devotees. In those whose hearts are mysterious and deep (like an ocean), the bhava manifests not at all or to a very slight extent. In those whose hearts are fickle and shallow like a pond, in them bhava is excessively manifest. Since there are no rules for the manifestation of bhava, it is not elaborated upon.</blockquote>Hence the manifestation of bhava upon coming in contact with vibhAvAlambana (Sri Krishna) is dependent on the nature of the devotee. There is no gradation of superiority or inferiority here. According to Visvanatha's Madhurya Kadambini, the real darshan of Sri Krishna takes place when prema appears within the heart of the devotee.

June 2, 2002

In regards to Vrajavasis etc. you may be curious to know that most of the present-day Vrajavasis have come to Radhakund from outside of Vraja. After Raghunatha Das Gosvami and Jiva Gosvami made arrangements for securing the Radha Kund area from the back-then Muslim ruler, for a few centuries the residents of Radha Kund consisted of practically only Babajis. Due to the Muslim rule, everyone had to respect Sri Radha Kund as the place of the saints.

However, when the rule changed to the British rule, a lot of people were brought in from outside the Vraja, and no-one respected the certificate given by the Muslim ruler. People came in and occupied land by force. Since then, the newcomer Vrajavasis have on several occasions claimed Radha Kund as their property, and by force restricted the babajis from bathing there. On occasions this has led to fights when pilgrims from Rajasthan for instance have objected to this and stood up against the locals in favor of the babajis, who were not keen of rising a riot over it.

Overall, considering the history of people immigrating to the babajis' bhajan-sthali and starting to make money there, either in regular business or in pilgrim business, and importing a world of sensual attractions there, it should be no wonder that there may be some ill feelings between the sadhu community and the locals. Of course this does not count for the Vrajavasis who have genuine honor for the life and precepts of Sri Caitanya and the six Gosvamis.

June 2, 2002

In the Sri Caitanya Matha, the original matha of Bhaktisiddhanta, the devotees believe that Radha Kunda, Shyama Kunda and Giriraja Govardhana have manifest there due to the spiritual power of Bhaktisiddhanta. Either nowadays or during the times of Bhaktisiddhanta, did the residents there walk two kilometers outside the place to pass stool? And if so, did they pass stool in plastic bags there and carry them outside the Gaura Mandala? The entire dhama is made of cintamani, don't forget. Not only one particular place. Let us try to get a life and let's rather address some substantial concerns.

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 06-02-2002).]

June 2, 2002

Thanks JNDas for clarifying this. Very happy to see your non-sectarian response to mud slinging. We feel happy in your forums.

June 1, 2002

Originally posted by krishnas:

Hence, if someone interprets the Gosvaamiis writings to say something that flies in the face of the shruti, then they are misunderstanding the Gosvaamiis.

Would you like to offer any definition of "parampara" or "sampradaya" based on shruti?

In this case, we have evidence from mainstream Vedic literature that shiksha paramparaas exist. The sole evidence for your position being Hari-bhakti Vilaasa, I would argue that your extreme emphasis on the diiksha prescriptions, by which you conclude that the Bhaktisiddhaanta line is not bona fide for lack of explicit diiksha, is undue.

I would like to inquire something from our Pandits here:

Everywhere in the Gaudiya tradition besides the Gaudiya Matha, succession is drawn based on diksa-lines for all I have seen. Even in the present-day Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON, succession is presented along the diksa-lines beginning from Bhaktisiddhanta.

But what about the four Vaishnava sampradayas of the present day, is the line of succession there drawn based on diksa or siksa? Has anyone studied the matter?

The Gaudiiya line is a continuation of the Maadhva line, in which there are numerous shiksha connections.

May I request you to present examples of these numerous siksa-connections?

If it is the conclusion of Hari-bhakti Vilaasa that a sampradaaya can only consist of diiksha lines, then it contradicts Vedic tradition in which there is evidence of other shiksha lines (such as Krishna-Vivasvaan-Vaivasvata Manu-Ikshwaaku).

Would you have other examples of siksa-lineages at hand?

Please note that I am not saying that HbV is wrong. I am saying that these particular statements from HbV which you quote are being given more extreme emphasis by your party than the Gosvaamiis intended. Only when misinterpreted by such extreme, word-for-word devotion does the problem of conflict with other shaastras arise.

I have nothing but demonstrated how diksha is required when quoting the Gosvamis' writings. Would you disagree?

June 1, 2002

Dear Krishnadas,

First of all, please do understand that I am not defending the article which appeared on Nitai Das's site (it says "guest article" by the way). I do not endorse all views presented therein. I am merely expressing some views for your consideration, as I indicated in the very beginning of my comments.

While sometimes dissimilar, there are definitely a number of underlying, common themes among them. As I assume that all of you are coming in various lines descended from Laliita Prasaada (correct me if I am wrong), I inaugurated the term for ease of reference. It was not intended to be pejorative. If you feel that a better phrase can be used to describe your (plural) views, please let us know and we can use that.

Please do understand that there is no group of me, Jagat, Nitai et al. We are individuals from different sub-traditions of the Gaudiya tradition, unaffiliated with each other. Please do not speak about "LP party", it does not exist. Jagat is initiated by Lalita Prasad Thakura, Nitai Das is initiated by Tinkadi Gosvami of Nityananda Parivar, and I am initiated by Ananta Das Pandit, also of Nityananda Parivar, but a different lineage. The only common factor with us is that we belong to the traditional Gaudiya Vaishnava lineages. Besides allegiance to the six Gosvamis et al, we have no particular unity in our views beyond the views of anyone else.

So far, the pattern in this thread has been that, if I refute 10 points of the Nitai das article, you offer rebuttals on three of them, to which I offer responses for all three, and then you again respond on just one point the next time. What am I to think of this?

As far as addressing your points, could you do me a favour and boil down the essence of your points from your voluminous postings for which you expected a response? I would then gladly comment on them. But please, in a clear, concice form. You may wish to number them (1. Point one; 2. Point two) to help me keep track of your points.

If members of the LP party eschew the significance of shruti in establishing truth, then they cannot be called Vedaantists in any reasonable sense of the word. All Vedaantists accept the apaurusheya nature of the Vedas as an axiom. It is never acceptable to quote one's gurus' words as stand-alone evidence. Such a tradition as yours may be very interesting in and of itself, possibly even representing the formation of a new sampradaaya that deviates from the Gosvaamiis' line. But it is not the Gaudiiya Vaishnava sampradaaya in fact. If Jagat can make such a claim about the Bhaktisiddhaanta line, I fail to see why it is so wrong to regard yours (and his?) line in the same light.

No-one has suggested the validity of one's guru's words as stand-alone evidence. Guru-sAdhu-zAstra vAkya hRdaye koriya aikya (Narottama).

However, Jiva Gosvami has established the pramana-tattva in his Tattva Sandarbha. I have just posted an excerpt in regards to shruti and smriti here. Hence we rely more on the Bhagavata than we do on the shruti. Have you studied the Tattva Sandarbha?

Let me point out that I have little familiarity with your sampradaaya, beyond what you, Nitai das, Jagat, et. al. have stated. I have not tried to make up anything that I say about you. I have only restated what I have understood from your representation of your tradition.

If you wish to have an overview of what I regard as my tradition, you may pop in for a visit at http://www.raganuga.com .

Resorting to sarcasm will not help you.

Just please avoid this "Ahha! Just see, this group is defeated!", based on unfounded conjecturing. Please do not draw conclusions on anyone's stand prior to asking whether it is mine or anyone else's stand in reality. I tend to fade out from discussions when I detect a person who illegitimately takes a chance to declare me (or any given "group", "party") as defeated and deviant.

Thanks.

June 1, 2002

We all know Narottam Das' line Apana bhajana kathA nA balio jathA tathA--"Don't go telling the revelations you have received in bhajan here and there."

From the commentary of Ananta Das Pandit on this verse (PBC 119):<blockquote>"Now Srila Thakura Mahasaya concludes this Prema Bhakti Candrika by explaining how a devotee conceals his realisations in bhajana. The light of the moon of loving devotion must always be kept hidden within the heart, and by doing so the heart will be illuminated and cooled off, and the Cakora-bird-like life-airs will be blessed with the relish of the sweet nectar of prema.

The devotee should take care that he does not reveal his realisations in bhajana to anyone and everyone. When it is necessary the practitioner will reveal them to Sri Gurudeva and his own intimate rasika devotee-friends, but never to anyone else. It would harm his humility and would inevitably damage his bhajana. Prior to this Srila Thakura Mahasaya has repeatedly warned the practitioners about this in verses like: 'rAkho prema hRdaye bhariyA' ("Keep your love hidden in your heart"), and 'gupate sAdhibe siddhi' ("By secretly practicing you attain perfection"). We can understand how important this point is because it is repeatedly mentioned.

Srimat Jiva Gosvamipada has written in the end of his Bhakti Sandarbha (339) --

atra ca zri guroH zrI bhagavato vA prasAda labdhaM sAdhana sAdhyagataM svIya sarvasva bhUtaM yat kim api rahasyaM tat tu na kasmaicit prakAzanIyam yathAha (BhAgavata 8.17.20) naitat parasmA AkhyeyaM pRSThayApi kathaJcana. sarvaM sampadyate devi deva guhyaM susaMvRtam --

Whatever confidential experiences are attained in connection with the practice and the goal given by the grace of Sri Guru or Sri Bhagavan, which are one’s very own treasure, should not be revealed to anyone. In Srimad Bhagavata Sri Vishnu tells Sri Aditi-devi -- O Devi! Whatever secrets I told you should never be revealed to anyone, even if someone inquires after it! All secrets of the gods in the sky will yield fruit only when kept secret.

</blockquote>

However, given the natural need for each one of us to hear histories of success in devotional service, I warmly recommend studying the hagiographies of the saints of the past. You may start at http://saints.raganuga.com if you wish. Reading Sri Bhakti Ratnakara is highly recommended.

June 1, 2002

On one of the websites promoting a form of gaudiya vaishnavism I saw a picture which will be considered offensive by any traditional person familiar with agama sastras. It is a picture of a gopi lifting her frock and there is a sadhaka sitting under her loins. There are very ugly forms of gaudiya vaishnavism.

On account of your mundane vision you imagine the picture to represent something it does not.

The picture depicts Raghunatha Das Gosvami who is absorbed in samadhi in the mid-day heat, under the scorching rays of the sun, unaware of bodily pains and pleasures. Out of compassion for Her beloved devotee, Sri Radha manifests on the earthly plane and protects Das Gosvami from the heat of the sun. The picture is a perfect illustration of the words of Sri Gita (9.22):

<center>ananyaz cintayanto mAM ye janAH paryupAsate

teSAM nityAbhiyuktAnAM yoga-kSemaM vahAmy aham</center>

This is the beauty of Bhagavan's affection towards His devotees. Please do not glance upon the world filled with negative prejudice. It will bring about no good.

Sri Jiva reasons the value of the Bhagavata over sruti in the present day and age as follows:

<blockquote>tatra ca veda-zabdasya samprati duSpAratvAd duradhigamArthatvAc ca tad-artha nirNAyakAnAM munInAm api paraspara-virodhAd veda-rUpo vedArtha-nirNAyakaz cetihAsa-purANAtmakaH zabda eva vicAraNIyaH. tatra ca yo vA veda-zabdo nAtha-viditaH so'pi pramotpAdakatvaM sthitam.

Because at present it is difficult to study the Vedas in their entirety -- it is difficult to understand their meaning -- and because the great thinkers who have commented on the Vedas interpret them in contradictory ways, we should therefore study only the Itihasas and Puranas, since they are Vedic in nature and are conclusive in determining the meaning of the Vedas. Moreover, with the help of the Itihasas and Puranas we can infer the meaning of the unavailable portions of the Vedas. Thus at present only the Itihasas and Puranas are the appropriate sources of valid knowledge.

tathA hi mahAbhArate mAnavIye ca – itihAsa-purANAbhyAM vedaM samupabRMhayet iti, pUranAt purANam iti cAnyatra. na cAvedena vedasya bRMhaNaM sambhavati nah y aparipUrNasya kanaka-valayasya trapuNA pUraNaM yujyate.

This is why the Mahabharata (Adi-parva 1.267) and Manu-samhita state, "One should complement one's understanding of the Vedas with the help of the Itihasas and the Puranas." And elsewhere it is stated, "The Puranas are called by that name because they are complete." It is not possible to complete or explain the meaning of the Vedas with something that is not Vedic in nature, just as it is improper to finish an incomplete gold bracelet with lead.</blockquote>

It has been discussed elsewhere how less than six percent of the original body of sruti (1130 Samhitas, 1130 Brahmanas, 1130 Aranyakas and 1130 Upanishads) is presently available.

Which questions particularly about Gaudiya Vaishnavism have you raised? I already made the point that the specific details for each tradition's practices will not be found in the shruti shastra.

I am reading a book, "Philosophy and Theistic Mysticism of the Alvars" by S.M.S. Chari. Aside the Visishtadvaita theory, I wonder how much of the beautiful, emotional devotion they exhibited can be justified solely on the basis of shruti shastra. Anandamayo 'bhyAsAt? Or let me try something easier: Could you establish the position of Lakshmi-Narayana as the supreme, original form of Divinity solely on the basis of shruti shastra? I would be very impressed.

[This message has been edited by raga (edited 06-01-2002).]

June 1, 2002