Beggar

Here's the entire event on video:

Sarva gattah, don't you see the limitations of the material language called English as you try to explain your thoughts about eternity? In one sentence we are nitya siddha and the next not. I know that you'll say, no, no, you don't understand but actually I do. I understand what truth that you are trying to convey. But why try so hard? Just let the acaryas, sastra and Srila Prabhupada do the explaining. There's only so much a imperfect being can convey because most of it doesn't really depend on our words but the level of our realization which in bhakti means how much we love Krsna. In our conditioned state, so much or our own stuff will come out so that others will perceive it as politically tainted. Just let Prabhupada do the explaining. The devotees will get what they are going to get according to their level of attainment and whatever divine mercy will come their way. I guess that I'm talking to myself, also.

Corporal cbrahma refers to 5 star general, Srila Sridhar Maharaja, as private. Puffed up, insolent, little *!

For a preaching movement there will always be the need for money, men (personnel) and materials. When the patients who are to eventually become doctors remain patients, its because our disease is still showing its symptoms. So if the money, men and materials - big temple properties become a source of competitive tension, then what to do? "If you ever get money print books". "I would sell the marble in the temples and print books". Do we remember reading this somewhere? But what to you do when the temples have installed dieties and so, on? Anyway how could a spiritual movement proceed without a mature adviser, within or without? We have the books but everyone is squabbling about the interpretation - see the origin of the soul issue.

Personally I try not to be an obsessive fault finder, but I am about to call a spade and spade. This is a first hand experience that I have previously posted in an abbreviated form. When I was in Phoenix last month the Iskcon TP informed me that Hridayananda Maharaja was his GBC. I said, "Oh and how is that?" He replied, "It's like having a fringy as your GBC. Usually he comes to the temple wearing shorts and a t-shirt." Giving the benefit of the doubt I replied that, "maybe he's just not into formalities." Then the TP replied, "Yeah but I'm not sure if he even believes in the philosophy (of Krsna Consciousness) anymore. His classes are more like those of a college professor than of a devotee." Somehow I believe that aspiring devotees need more than that, for a guru. I guess its true that you get what you deserve, but it certainly is unfortunate.

Obviously internal realization is most important, yet the requirement of formal initiation is a necessity for the overwhelming majority of practitioners. There is although, plenty of room for the exceptions such as George Harrison and others. Here's an example and of course all examples have their limitations. Suppose a society wants couples to stay together and raise their children in an intact family unit. In the marriage ceremony the couple takes a vowel to stay together, but that doesn't mean they really will. The formal ceremony just increases their chances and helps to reinforce the values of monogamy. Similarly, formal initiation and diksa are there to help increase sraddha or faith and guru nistha. Of course connection with a bona fide guru should be held in a higher regard than a mundane relationship. If formal connection with a real guru leads to a substantial connection with guru and Krsna then that is a good thing. So clearly it is iconoclastic and nihilistic to denigrate the formal connection with guru. Of course if one believes that there are no bona fide spiritual masters on the face of the Earth at present, then it may be a good propaganda tactic to argue in such a way. But like I noted previously, even the Rtviks have their Rtvik gurus perform formal initiations.

This is a huge jump of logic, that since that since real initiation is transcendent then "formal diksa is not necessary". If this was Srila Prabhupada's understanding then he made a big mistake by giving his followers first and second initiation or diksa. When I joined Iskcon in 1971 why was I subjected to having to chant at least 16 rounds, follow the 4 rules, live in the temple and do full time service for 6 months before I was recommended for hare nama initiation? Did the temple president, Satsvarupa Prabhu, make these things up? Obviously, not he was constantly in correspondance with Srila Prabhupada, almost more than anyone to do his editing work. Everyone knows that these were Prabhupada's instructions to the temple presidents and that the GBCs were supposed to make sure that these things were carried out properly. EVEN THE RTVIK CAMP GIVES FORMAL DIKSA on "behalf of Srila Prabhupada. So cbrahma is so dull that he does not see that he is actually calling Srila Prabhupada a traditional ritualist. This is all word jugglery or semantics. For instance, in current English usage the word "tradition" connotes something that is merely accepted because our parents and grandparents accepted it. The word "tradition" therefore has a pejoritive flavor in today's common usage. But an English speaker 100 years ago would find no problem in calling a line of disciplic succession or parampara a "tradition". So by "traditional system" in this context cbrahma means the process of receiving hare nama by accepting tulasi mala from a Gaudiya Vaisnava guru and then eventually accepting the gayatri mantras. So what he is implying is that anyone who receives formal initiation is somehow bound by the conditioning nature of that process to make a superficial approach to divinity. No doubt some persons do have such a mentality. But if such a superficial mentality is the product of the hare nama initiation and diksa process then why would it have been created in its current style by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur and brought to the West by Srila Prabhupada? I am fairly sure that Srila Prabhupada would consider cbrahma's statements to be atheistic (or at least bordering on it). Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu is actually Krsna, Himself with the heart and effulgence of Srimati Radharani. I think that His chanting has a special quality.

Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 15.110 ākṛṣṭiḥ kṛta-cetasāḿ su-manasām uccāṭanaḿ cāḿhasām ācaṇḍālam amūka-loka-sulabho vaśyaś ca mukti-śriyaḥ no dīkṣāḿ na ca sat-kriyāḿ na ca puraścaryāḿ manāg īkṣate mantro 'yaḿ rasanā-spṛg eva phalati śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmātmakaḥ SYNONYMS ākṛṣṭiḥ — attraction; kṛta-cetasām — of saintly persons; su-manasām — of the most liberal-minded; uccāṭanam — annihilator; ca — also; aḿhasām — of sinful reactions; ā-caṇḍālam — even to the caṇḍālas; amūka — except the dumb; loka-su-labhaḥ — very easy to achieve for all persons; vaśyaḥ — full controller; ca — and; mukti-śriyaḥ — of the opulence of liberation; na u — not; dīkṣām — initiation; na — not; ca — also; sat-kriyām — pious activities; na — not; ca — also; puraścaryām — regulative principles before initiation; manāk — slightly; īkṣate — depends upon; mantraḥ — mantra; ayam — this; rasanā — tongue; spṛk — touching; eva — simply; phalati — is fruitful; śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāma-ātmakaḥ — consisting of the holy name of Lord Kṛṣṇa. TRANSLATION What a beautiful verse. Of course it was written by Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī. If Krsna nama wants to merge someone in ecstacy, He can do what ever He wants. This is an example of krpa siddha. But the formal system of hare nama initiation and diksa goes on. The reason is the example given by Srila Prabhupada that most persons will have to go to four years of college to get a degree. Occasionally a person will receive an honorary degree, but we can't count on it and that is why we must follow the process given by the acaryas.

I just heard a lecture where Srila Narayana Maharaja said that if you have a bona fide spiritual master and follow his instructions and surrender that one day you will find that you are not in the material world at all, you will find yourself in transcedental Vrndavana with Krsna and His associates.

It's a sad fact that sometimes this is true. Yet, it is not at all necessary. Sometimes ex-Iskcon devotees do not approach GM gurus for the proper reasons. Sometimes they don't really hear but only hear what they want to, what already fits into their preconceived notions about the way things are. Some people are chronic fault-finders and they take it no matter where they go, no matter how many times they are admonished to give it up. This is the way of the world, so what can be done. Oh, I know, when in doubt always blame the godbrothers of Srila Prabhupada, their disciples and their followers. It will make you feel so much better about yourself that at least being a "real" follower of Srila Prabhupada, you are so much better than them. Of course it goes both ways. The idea is to be humble, trna adapi sunicena..., not puffed up.

Blame, blame. Hate, hate. Blame the Gaudiya Math that from your angle of vision, that not all gurus are saksad hari or blame the concept of the requirement of physically present guru. Then there's Suchandra's statement implying that a system of taking initiation from a bona fide physically present guru is requirement that's holding back Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's Sankirtan Mission, As Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur said, "religion means proper adjustment." Of course if cbrahma read this quote he would flip. Maybe he would ever accuse Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur of being a mundane religionist. These guys cannot adjust the idea of receiving Krsna nama from the lips of a pure devotee and the fact that the sastra states that the Nama is so powerful that diksa may not be required. Who can but a pure devotee. I can't, but at least we should not blame, blame, hate, hate. This was not Srila Prabhupada's program, only a very confused person would go in that direction.

At least GM now plans to revamp their entire fleet and get rid of gas guzzlers !

Someone should quote this since cbrahma is blocking my posts. September 14, 1969: Tittenhurst Park Estate London. England Srila Prabhupada: ...Evam parampara-praptam: In this way, by disciplic succession, the knowledge is coming down. Sa kaleneha mahata yogo nastah parantapa: But in the course of time the succession was broken. Therefore, Krsna says, I am speaking it to you again. So a mantra should be received from the disciplic succession. The Vedic injunction is sampradaya-vihina ye mantras te nisphala matah. If your mantra does not come through the disciplic succession, it will not be effective. Mantras te nisphala. Nisphala means that it will not produce the desired result. So the mantra must be received through the proper channel, or it will not act. A mantra cannot be manufactured. It must come from the original Supreme Absolute, coming down through the channel of disciplic succession. It has to be received in that way, and only then will it act. According to our Krsna consciousness philosophy, the mantra is coming down through four channels of disciplic succession: one through Lord siva, one through the goddess Laksmi, one through Lord Brahma, and one through the four Kumaras. The same thing comes down through different channels. These are called the four sampradayas, or disciplic successions. So, one has to take his mantra from one of these four sampradayas; then only is that mantra active. If we receive the mantra in that way, it will be effective. And if one does not receive his mantra through one of these sampradaya channels, then it will not act; it will not give fruit. Yoko Ono: If the mantra itself has such power, does it matter where you receive it, where you take it? Srila Prabhupada: Yes, it does matter. For instance, milk is nutritious. That's a fact; everyone knows. But if milk is touched by the lips of a serpent, it is no longer nutritious. It becomes poisonous. Yoko Ono: Well, milk is material. Srila Prabhupada: Yes, it is material. But since you are trying to understand spiritual topics through your material senses, we have to give material examples. Yoko Ono: Well, no, I don't think you have to give me the material sense. I mean, the mantra is not material. It should be something spiritual; therefore, I don't think anybody should be able to spoil it. I wonder if anybody can actually spoil something that isn't material. Srila Prabhupada: But if you don't receive the mantra through the proper channel, it may not really be spiritual. John Lennon: How would you know, anyway? How are you able to tell? I mean, for any of your disciples or us or anybody else who goes to any spiritual master how are we to tell if he's for real or not? Srila Prabhupada: You shouldn't go to just any spiritual master. John Lennon: Yes, we should go to a true master. But how are we to tell one from the other? Srila Prabhupada: It is not that you can go to just any spiritual master. He must be a member of a recognized sampradaya, a particular line of disciplic succession. John Lennon: But what if one of these masters who's not in the line says exactly the same thing as one who is? What if he says his mantra iscoming from the Vedas and he seems to speak with as much authority as you? He could probably be right. It's confusing like having too many fruits on a plate. Srila Prabhupada: If the mantra is actually coming through a bona fide disciplic succession, then it will have potency. John Lennon: But the Hare Krsna mantra is the best one? Srila Prabhupada: Yes.

The only real important thing about the concepts of the origin of the jiva souls is the siddhanta itself. As far as our origin is concerned, none of us will ever experience it [again] (a thought within time). When a jiva meets Krsna, face to face, is it important whether one believes that he/she never met Krsna before but it seems like, "I've know Him forever" or that individual believes that I was with Krsna before and now I'm meeting my old friend and "I've know Him forever"? The experience of meeting Krsna would be same either way. IOW there's the thoughts of the "philosohy" of Krsna Consciousness while we are still in the conditioned stage and there is actually meeting Krsna! Like Prabhupada said, how do we know that we were not with Krsna before we were in the brahmajyoti? This is the application of the Crow and Tal Fruit logic. But applying such logic, why can't you say, "how do you know that we were not in the brahmajyoti at the point of our origin?" Remember "point of origin" means previously whether you conceive it in the brahmajyoti or Vaikuntha. Previously means that we are now within material time. When we experience being with Krsna all that will fade away, like our memories of being in the material world. At that point beyond material time we will have always been with Krsna! From that viewpoint we will have always been in our nitya swarupa. So the whole controversy is really over semantics and due to the limitations of our material language. The controversy itself is an illusion. Therefore it is not necessary to do things like translating a Jaiva Dharma with an, "your from Goloka", slant. No embellishments on Srila Prabhupada's books or the books of Thakur Bhaktivinoda are required unless they are the realizations of someone who is established ( or re-established) in their full relationship with Krsna. Remember you can lead all the aspiring devotee horses to water but you cannot make them drink. To try to make them drink is over-endeavor and an attempt to be the controller and that is completely contradictory to our goal.

The acceptance of the tatastha origins conception from the viewpoint of material time in no way contracts the concept that all jivas are the eternal servants of Krsna and have forgoten their relationship with Him. The tatastha origins conception is there is Jaiva Dharma as well as Srila Prabhupada's books. The Crow and the Tal Tree (Fruit) metaphor is a two edge sword. It shows that any origin conception based from viewpoint of material time can be defeated by logic. But the reason the tatastha origin concept is given is that within that paradigm the Lords statement, Those who reach it [My Abode] never return to this material world." (Bg 15.6) can be harmonized. Also as I wrote before such a concept accentuates the idea that the Lord's eternal associates are infallible or don't fall down. Now if a person has no experience of theologies that harmonize paradoxes they would see a large contradiction; the contradiction that how can we be eternal servants of Krsna and originate from a realm where no service is possible? But that apparent contradiction is certainly harmonized by Mahaprabhu's doctrine of acintya bheda [a]bheda tattva. Therefore the sastra never says that the jivas originate in Vaikuntha or Goloka. But in a way you are not completely wrong, Sarva for you would always rather see things from the eternal viewpoint. But your mistake is to assail the tatastha origin conception and see it as some sort of impersonalist plot which it certainly is not. One can understand that the tatastha origins conception is from the viewpoint of time and that the eternal servant of Krsna (and eternal relationship) is from the angle of eternity. The biggest problem with a Goloka or Vaikuntha origin theory is that it fails to take into account, "Those who reach it [My Abode] never return to this material world." (Bg 15.6), therefore it is never accepted. The statement by Srila Prabhupada that "millions of years ago we came down from Vaikuntha", is itself from the viewpoint of time and therefore can also be subjected to Crow and Tal Fruit Logic. Here's how, the question could be asked, "what about before we came down from Vaikuntha some millions of year ago?" And don't say that Srila Prabhupada's words on this subject are not also subject to Crow and Tal Fruit Logic, because they are, according to his own statements. All statements from the viewpoint of time have their limitations, by definition,

So what do the ideas expressed below mean to you?: Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur Jaiva Dharma

It is clear to me that you are actually mixing the fall from Goloka or Vaikuntha theory with the idea that we have actually forgotten Krsna. Also you are "mixing and matching" at your whim. Then you take Prabhupada's Bhagavatam statement that no one falls from Vaikuntha as meaning that we are all actually still there in our nitya swaupa but have forgotten. But I am not arguing that from the eternal viewpoint that we are separated from our eternal swarupa and concomitant service only by time. What I am saying is that you can't have it both ways. From the viewpoint of time the jivas fall from a position in between the material and spiritual worlds. So I've been trying to meet you at least half way and say, "why view the topic from the viewpoint of time anyway"? Isn't it good enough for you that we just see that we are the eternal servants of Krsna and that we have an eternal relationship with Krsna? Bas - why is there a problem? The problem is really only plain old politics. If certain followers of Sridhar Maharaj want to over emphasize tatashta conception and forget that this material existence is a dream then that is their politics but it is not reality. So again in reality all the acaryas and their followers agree that, "we are the eternal servants of Krsna and that we have an eternal relationship with Krsna". And besides the disagreement arises when we try to over-analyze these concepts and we have also been warned by acaryas not to do so. We will only realize the true nature of our origin and existence by the chanting of the pure name of Krsna or suddha nama. Until that day comes we can help the process on by telling everyone that they are the eternal servants of Krsna and that the only remedy is to chant His name and serve His pure devotees.

When you can't figure out a good defense for a meaningless argument - go on the attack. The above argument by cbrahma makes sense in a general way but not in the context of what's being discussed. It is just a smokescreen. When you don't know what to say just accuse those who don't agree with you as being rigid and legalistic adherants to Vedic rituals, as if this is what Kulapavana is proposing, because he is not. In cbrahma's view those who receive the gayatri mantras in the right ear from a qualified guru and the sacred thread are Vedic religionists. Of course then there is the fire sacrifice and this whole thing is a system that Srila Prabhupada passed on from his guru with some slight adjustments. But never mind that, just sling accusations which in total ignorance ultimately are offenses to Srila Prabhupada and the entire guru varga. And then when your done, show us again how you are the most loyal follower of Srila Prabhupada.

Its the basic principle - form or formality always is less important than the substance of anything. The statement, "clothes makes the man", is a superficial approach for a great man is a great man, whether he wears fashionable clothes or not. But does this mean that we should abandon wearing clothes and go naked in public? This is the logic of persons like cbrahma. They are so sectarean and neophyte that they think that Prabhupada is the only one who taught that formality is not important. And in every diksa line amongst the Gaudiya Vaisnavas the diksa line continues in the disciplic succession. But they think that Srila Prabhupada's line should stop with him and that aspirants should be initiated by his books. Why is everyone else wearing clothes? Why did both Krsna and Mahaprabhu take formal diksa?

If this were the case then after his heart attack in 1967 Prabhupada would have permanently retired to India, wrote his books from there and sent audio cassette tapes of his lectures and talks back to his Western temples. But he didn't he contiuned despite failing health to travel all over the world to give his association and initiate disciples. Of course sometimes he would chant on beads and have them sent to the devotees or some devotees heard the gayatris spoken by Srila Prabhupada only on tape. But behind this was Srila Prabhupada's specific intention to accept a particular disciple. There are always exceptions to a rule because there are exceptional people. Suppose one had diksa in a previous life or lives and had a very high level of advancement. That person would receive so much benefit from reading Srila Prabhupada's books. But if their sukrti and understanding was high enough then they would be inspired by the books to seek out the association of a person who personified the books, the person bhagavat.

Remember devotees like cbrahma and theist according to the parts of their life stories (as they have given), had some personal association with Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada. Even if that association was very brief, it was none the less very powerful. In the association of such a powerful guru, anything is possible, so who dares judge that? But the general dictum is that one should take formal diska or initiation for hare nama and gayatri mantras. <table style="border-collapse: collapse;" border="0" cellspacing="5" width="85%"><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="10"> </td> <!-- Left table --> <td rowspan="2" valign="top" width="100%"> <!-- end of heading--> <!-- start of body --> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td class="Title" align="center">Criticize and Lose the Holy Name</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <hr> <table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="203"> <tbody><tr> <td> Srila Narayana Maharaja </td> </tr> </tbody></table> Bhagavat Saptah [Part 1] Mathura, India: 1994 Tridandisvami Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja <hr> Today is the third day of our Srimad-Bhagavatam classes. We are in the midst of relating the history of Ajamila and the glories of chanting the holy names of the Lord. We see here that the holy name is so powerful that one does not require diksa (brahminical initiation), or the five activities performed before taking diksa, to assure full success. Just by naming his son Narayana, which is the name of one of Lord Krsna's incarnations, Ajamila began chanting the Lord's Holy Name. He had he taken diksa when he first spoke the name of Narayana. Furthermore, he was so fallen that there was not a single sin he had not committed. He used to take intoxication and engage in other illicit activities. Such a person uttered the name of the Lord when he named his son Narayana, and received so much benefit. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura says that the very day Ajamila named his son Narayana, all his sins were finished – just by his first utterance of the holy name. After that, the rest of the holy names he called out constituted his sadhana. We see that all the while he was taking the name, he continued to act unlawfully – stealing, taking intoxication and so on. However, we should not consider his behavior at this point to be sinful. Yes, these activities were going on, but they had no power in them. You can understand it like this – if you put some peas in the ground, they will sprout and grow. Now roast some peas and try to grow them. Even if you fertilize the ground with many kilos of icow dung and give it plenty of water, they will not sprout. Similarly, all Ajamila’s sins were burned, simply by his calling out the names of Narayana. Now his unlawful activities, which seemed like lowly fruitive activities in the eyes of ordinary persons, no longer constituted sin. His activities can be compared with a snake whose poisonous teeth have been pulled out. The snake still continues to bite because it is his habit, but there is no more poison. Similarly, now Ajamila’s unlawful activities had no power to give any fruits to bind him. If a rope is burnt, its shape is still there in the ashes, but when one touches the ashes, the shape falls apart and cannot be used as a rope. The result of Ajamila chanting the names of Lord Narayana was that he attained the association of the Visnudutas, who are associates of the Lord Himself, and inadvertently took diksa initiation from them. Up to that point his chanting was called nama-abhasa (the clearing stage of chanting), because whatever else he did, he had not committed any offences to a Vaisnava. He had not disrespected the Vaisnavas in this life or any previous life. By his nama-abhasa he received the association of the Visnudutas, who gave him diksa and explained to him the full glories of the holy names. sadhu-sanga, nama-kirtana, bhagavata sravanam mathura-vasa, sri-murtira sraddhaya sevana sakala-sadhana srestha ei panca anga krsna prema janmaye e panca (CC Madhya 22.128-129) Srila Rupa Gosvami has promised: “One should stay in Vrndavana under the guidance of a sadhu, chant the holy names, hear Srimad Bhagavatam from the lotus mouth of a rasika Vaisnava and serve the Deity of the Lord. There is no doubt that by performing these five activities one will surely receive krsna-prema.” However, there is one condition – there should be no disrespect or offence to the Vaisnava. This is our dilemma. We are doing hari-nama, staying in the holy place and hearing Bhagavatam, but we are not really hearing. Sometimes, some of us only act as if we are following. We speak publicly on the Bhagavatam and give instructions to others, but we do not protect ourselves from offense to Vaisnavas. Joking and laughing, we somehow disrespect or criticize Vaisnavas. The holy name (who is God Himself) cannot tolerate this. Therefore, we deceive ourselves and we are deprived of the real fruit of chanting the holy name. In this way, many lifetimes are wasted.... </td></tr></tbody></table>

If you look at Mahesraja's Sun article you'll see that he only glorifies Srila Prabhupada as that person who spread the holy name of Krsna around the world. Srila Narayana Maharaja Alachua, Florida : May 28, 2001:

But despite being the siksa guru parampara, the Gaudiya Vaisnava line puts the stress on bhakti or devotion not knowledge or jnana. Transcendental knowledge means firstly sambandha jnana or knowing that we are the eternal servants of Krsna and then acting on that knowledge.

It seem that by "mood", theist is referring to the temperament that one displays over time in their posts. Such a temperament becomes obvious to anyone who is closely paying attention. To allege that no one can ascertain another's temperament through their writings is an extremely defensive position to take. I wonder if cbrahma really believes this; then again, maybe he is convinced that he is always right and cannot learn from anyone on this forum, unless they ditto everything that he writes.