Beggar

I didn't make this up:

Narayana Maharaja:

Kama-gayatri and gopal-mantra are transcendental, and they give a relationship with Krsna. Kama Gayatri was previously brahma-gayatri. Then the personified Upanisads heard the glory of rasa-lila and the gopis' mood, and they developed a very thick greed to attain that. Thus, by the grace of Yogamaya, this brahma-gayatri became kama-gayatri.

Even from the university professor viewpoint, this is the theology of Caitanya Saraswat Vaisnvaism. The babajis believe that one gets siddha pranali at initiation and then learns of their siddha svarupa. Srila Saraswati Thakur taught that by the combination of Mahamantra, kama-gayatri and gopal-mantra, siddha svarupa will come naturally as the prasada of this process for those who are surrendered, saranagatah. This is the meaning of what Srila Prabhupada gave when he initiated one (gave diksa) into these mantras. The concept of becoming brahmana and therefore becoming qualified to do arcana was also explained by Srila Prabhupada, but there is a much deeper meaning to the diksa mantras and eventually the sanyassa mantra. We need to learn of these things in order to give the proper regard even if we are incapable of carrying out the order to chant these mantras purely or even at all. Otherwise we will become lost in all these external concepts like the topic this thread proposes.

... Also in 2nd initiation, one gets Gayatri mantra.

 

To be eligible for Krishna is not the matter of externals but purification of the heart. As one becomes more and more steady in one's spiritual practice, he/she will want to do more and more for the Lord and awakening of desire for Deity worship wherein you can touch, bathe, dress the Deities is natural progression for some. For this reason, devotees in ISKCON take 2nd/Brahman initiation.

 

Hare Krishna!

Narayana Maharaja:

Kama-gayatri and gopal-mantra are transcendental, and they give a relationship with Krsna. Kama Gayatri was previously brahma-gayatri. Then the personified Upanisads heard the glory of rasa-lila and the gopis' mood, and they developed a very thick greed to attain that. Thus, by the grace of Yogamaya, this brahma-gayatri became kama-gayatri.

beggar swamin, you and I follow the same glorious tradition. So why break the faith

Canto 10: The Summum

Bonum Chapter 14: Brahmā's Prayers to Lord Kṛṣṇa Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 10.14.38

jānanta eva jānantu

kiḿ bahūktyā na me prabho

manaso vapuṣo vāco

vaibhavaḿ tava go-caraḥ

SYNONYMS

jānantaḥ — persons who think they are aware of Your unlimited potency; eva — certainly; jānantu — let them think like that; kim — what is the use; bahu-uktyā — with many words; na — not; me — my; prabho — O Lord; manasaḥ — of the mind; vapuṣaḥ — of the body; vācaḥ — of the words; vaibhavam — opulences; tava — Your; go-caraḥ — within the range.

TRANSLATION

There are people who say, "I know everything about Kṛṣṇa." Let them think that way. As far as I am concerned, I do not wish to speak very much about this matter. O my Lord, let me say this much: As far as Your opulences are concerned, they are all beyond the reach of my mind, body and words.

PURPORT

This translation is quoted from Śrīla Prabhupāda's Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līla, Chapter Twenty-one, Text 27.

I have to not agree with this. If it is so then the DVD paradigum would be incorrect. Srila Prabhupada has said that the person in ignorance(sudra) gets everything that the brahman gets. Because all are to be concidered transendental and not of these varnas or asramas. But just acting out for the sake of guna and karma that the devotee is by nature incline to.

 

RCB

The daiva varnasrama paradigm is not incorrect. It is for those on a low level of devotional service like most of the Western devotees (us). But it is your interpretation of what Prabhupada said that is incorrect. An aspiring Vaisnava who is attracted to someone like Srila Prabhupada and the Caitanyite conception of Krsna he is giving is not really in ignorance. But because of external conditioning he may be in the habit of working as a sudra such as a laborer. So although from a material viewpoint he may appear to be digging a ditch to lay plumbing for a devotional project, if he is doing this to please a bonafide guru and Krsna then he is not really in tama guna and he is gradually being elevated by his Krsna karma yoga.

The glorious path and sampradaya I follow is beyond your understanding.

And it is beyond Justin's understanding also, otherwise if it was so easy, then how would it be glorious?

List of archaic English words and their modern equivalents

 

ज्ञानकोश: - The Indological Knowledgebase

This is a list of words and spellings which are now considered archaic or obsolescent within the current status of the English language. Given both the rapidity of change in modern English and the number of versions used by nations and cultures, it should be borne in mind that dates are approximate and that the information here may not apply to all versions of English.

The evolution of the English language is characterised by four phases. The first period dates from approximately 450 to 1150 AD. At this time the language made use of full inflection, and is called Anglo-Saxon, or more exactly Old English. The second period dates from about 1150 to 1350 and is called Early English (or sometimes Old English again). During this time the majority of the inflections disappeared, and many Norman and French words joined the language because of the profound influence of the Anglo-Norman ruling class. The third period dates from about 1350 to 1550, and is known as Middle English. At this time the shape of the language began to coalesce and a relatively standard orthography emerged. The last period, from about 1550, is called Modern English.

The impact of dictionaries in the definition of obsolescent or archaic forms has caused the standardisation of spelling, hence many variant forms have been consigned to the dustbin of history.

It should be noted that often poets and writers of prose with a very strong feel for the language may on occasion deliberately choose to use archaisms to emphasise a certain point or to create a mood.

 

<table align="center" border="1" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0"> <caption>Archaisms in the English language</caption> <tbody><tr> </tr> <tr> <td> art</td> <td> from are </td> <td> present second-person singular form of the verb be</td> <td> thou art (="you are") </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> betwixt</td> <td> -</td> <td> Between</td> <td> -</td> <td> - </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> bilbo</td> <td> From Bilbao the best known place of manufacture </td> <td> an obscure and seldom used word for a short sword</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Bilbo Baggins is a fictional character</td> </tr> <tr> <td> bobbish </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to be in good health </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Bouncable </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a swaggering boaster </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Bridewell </td> <td> from the London prison of that name</td> <td> a prison </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> caddish </td> <td> from the noun cad</td> <td> wicked </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> the noun 'cad' is dying out</td> </tr> <tr> <td> cag-mag </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> decaying meat </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> chalk scores </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a reference to accounts of debt, recorded with chalk marks </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> coddleshell </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> codicil; a modification to one's legal will </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Coiner </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a counterfeiter </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> costermonger </td> <td> coster comes from Costard, a type of cooking apple , monger means trader or seller </td> <td> a greengrocer, seller of fruit and vegetables </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> fishmonger, ironmonger and warmonger are among the surviving words ending in -monger</td> </tr> <tr> <td> cove </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a fellow or chap </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> dost</td> <td> from do </td> <td> present second-person singular form of the verb do</td> <td> thou dost (="you do") </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> doth</td> <td> from do </td> <td> present third-person singular form of the verb do</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> drab </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a whore</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in Shakespeare's Macbeth: "Finger of birth-strangled babe, ditch-delivered by a drab."</td> </tr> <tr> <td> dream </td> <td> A part of the root stock of the OE vocabulary. </td> <td> joy</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> before the 13th century </td> <td> Under the influence of Old Norse speakers in England, the word dream changed its meaning from ``joy, festivity, noisy merriment" to ``a sleeping vision".</td> </tr> <tr> <td> -est</td> <td> unknown </td> <td> suffix used to form the present second-person singular of regular verbs</td> <td> thou goest (= "you go" in modern English) </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> -eth</td> <td> unknown </td> <td> suffix used to form the present third-person singular of regular verbs</td> <td> he goeth (= "he goes" in modern English) </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> ducats</td> <td> A bullion coin (not legal tender) used in international trade </td> <td> money</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> Ducats were displaced by sovereigns throughout the British empire </td> <td> used today only in slang. Ducats are still produced by the Austrian mint. Ducat, in Latin, means "he rules,she rules," or "it rules."</td> </tr> <tr> <td> fire a rick </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to burn a stack of hay (rick), as a form of protest</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> fluey </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> dusty </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> gaole </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> gaol alt. British English spelling of jail</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> mid-19th century </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Grinder </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a tutor who prepares students for examinations </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> hast</td> <td> from have </td> <td> present second-person singular form of the verb have</td> <td> thou hast (="you have") </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> hath</td> <td> from have </td> <td> present third-person singular form of the verb have</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> heddes </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> heads</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> c. 1650s </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Indya </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> India</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> c. 1860 </td> <td> This spelling is still (occasionally) in use today. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> ivory tablets</td> <td> unknown</td> <td> paper for notetaking</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> kine</td> <td> Middle English kyen, a plural of the Old English cy, plural of cu, "cow"</td> <td> cows</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used until late 1800s; still in Biblical use; Spenser used the form kyne </td> </tr> <tr> <td> mote</td> <td> .</td> <td> may, might</td> <td> .</td> <td> .</td> <td> NB. It may be argued that it is not technically defunct since the word is still used in freemasonry as part of certain rituals. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> over the broomstick </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to be married in a folk ceremony and not recognized by the law. Still commonly used as part of the ceremony in modern Pagan weddings by Wiccans, Witches and other alternative spiritualities.</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s, "over the brush" still used in British English Cf jumping the broomstick </td> </tr> <tr> <td> quantum </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> money to pay a bill</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s. Still used in this sense in some legal terminology. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Quene </td> <td> OE. cwen (meaning a queen, a woman or a wife) </td> <td> Queen</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> c. 1650s </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> rantipole </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to behave in a romping or rude manner </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> read with </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to tutor </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s, still used in Caribbean English </td> </tr> <tr> <td> shake-down </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a bed </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s, also a modern slang term dealing with law enforcement </td> </tr> <tr> <td> shalt</td> <td> from shall </td> <td> used to form the future tense of verbs</td> <td> thou shalt (="you will") </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> stand high </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> to have a good reputation </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> thee, thou</td> <td> from Old English þú</td> <td> old 2nd person singular pronoun </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language.

Also still used in northern dialects of British English eg Yorkshire.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> thole</td> <td> from Old English þolian</td> <td> to bear; put up with; suffer </td> <td> A man with a good crop can thole some thistles - (Scots Proverb)</td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Still used in northern and Scottish dialects of British English eg Yorkshire.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> wert</td> <td> from be </td> <td> imperfect second-person singular form of the verb be</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> whitesmith </td> <td> from blacksmith, a iron worker</td> <td> a tinsmith </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s </td> </tr> <tr> <td> whitlow </td> <td> unknown</td> <td> a sore or swelling in a finger or thumb </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> Used in 1860s, still used in British English </td> </tr> <tr> <td> wilt</td> <td> from will </td> <td> used to form the future tense of verbs</td> <td> N/A </td> <td> unknown </td> <td> still used in Biblical/Shakespearian/poetical language</td> </tr> <tr> <td> wittles </td> <td> from "victuals"</td> <td> food </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> ? </td> <td> Used in 1860s, vittles still used in British and American English</td> </tr> <tr> <td> zounds </td> <td> corrupted form of "God's wounds"</td> <td> expletive </td> <td> N/A </td> <td> ? </td> <td> still used occasionally in British English </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 

<table width="462" border="0"><tbody><tr><td colspan="2" valign="top">

</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="10">

</td><td valign="top">

</td></tr></tbody></table>

...not the sharpest knife in the drawer

 

Sometimes you have to have a very sharp knife to cut through illusion.

And BTW, I prefer to read Srila Prabhupada's books the way they were when he entered samadhi. I just don't believe, based on changes in language, that people will speak the language that they are in, in a few thousands years. That doesn't mean I want the books changed now and I don't care for what Jayadvaita has done.

 

Nice try. For over a Century a standard Common English has developed and been spread throughout the entire world, on every continent.

 

Get some horse-sense, Prabhu. A Century means 100 years. We are talking about the changes in a language such as English that occur over hundreds and then thousands of years. When Prabhupada said these books are for the next ten thousand years, he meant the Srimad Bhagavatam as compiled by Veda Vyasa with the commentaries of the Acaryas, the Caitanya Caritamrta by Krsna das Kaviraja, and then the books that he had put into mid-twentieth Century English prose. But he was well aware that the language would change. He was not hung up on a particular form of language and that's why he allowed his books to be translated into such modern languages such as Spanish, French, German etc. Take it from the horses mouth.

Wikipedia:

Old English:

that was spoken and written in parts of what are now England and south-eastern Scotland between the mid-5th century and the mid-12th century. What survives through writing represents primarily the literary register of Anglo-Saxon. It is a West Germanic language and is closely related to Old Frisian. It also experienced heavy influence from Old Norse, a member of the related North Germanic group of languages.

Here is English from about 900 years ago:

The Lord's Prayer in Old English

Matthew 6:9-13

Fæder ure þu þe eart on heofonum

Si þin nama gehalgod

to becume þin rice

gewurþe ðin willa

on eorðan swa swa on heofonum.

urne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us todæg

and forgyf us ure gyltas

swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendum

and ne gelæd þu us on costnunge

ac alys us of yfele soþlice

The people who speak English in 4567 AD will suddenly not be able to understand Srila Prabhupada's perfect English?

 

Shakespeare produced most of his known work between 1590 and 1613.

Language is always changing. This is English from only about 400 years ago. How much will it change in a period five times as long or twenty-five times as long!

MACBETH. Methought I heard a voice cry, “Sleep no more!

Macbeth does murder sleep—the innocent sleep,

Sleep that knits up the ravelled sleave of care,

The death of each day’s life, sore labour’s bath,

Balm of hurt minds, great nature’s second course,

Chief nourisher in life’s feast.”

LADY. What do you mean?

MACBETH. Still it cried “Sleep no more” to all the house;

“Glamis hath murdered sleep, and therefore Cawdor

Shall sleep no more, Macbeth shall sleep no more.”

LADY. Who was it that thus cried? Why, worthy thane,

You do unbend your noble strength, to think

So brain-sickly of things. Go, get some water,

And wash this filthy witness from your hand.

Why did you bring these daggers from the place?

They must lie there. Go, carry them and smear

The sleepy grooms with blood.

MACBETH. I’ll go no more.

I am afraid to think what I have done;

Look on’t again I dare not.

LADY. Infirm of purpose!

Give me the daggers. The sleeping and the dead

Are but as pictures. ‘Tis the eye of childhood

That fears a painted devil. If he do bleed,

I’ll gild the faces of the grooms withal,

For it must seem their guilt.

Which part of "Prabhupada is not here to make the changes" do you not understand?

 

Unless of course you feel that the way things are in Iskcon now is perfect and that no changes are needed.

 

Farms - huge success!

Gurukulas - huge success!

Varnashrama dharma - huge success!

Sankirtan - huge success!

Temple service - huge success!

Congregation building - huge success!

Prasadam distribution - huge success!

Preaching to the scientists - huge success!

 

 

No, no changes are needed... we are a smashing hit on the world's religious scene...

But of course another way of looking at it would be to think, "Srila Prabhupada's instructions are perfect, but we just do not have the purity to carry them out properly."

I personally am not qualified to change diddly squat. I am talking about the potential for change like the changes made by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur such as [re]establishing Gaudiya Vaisnava sannyasa. I'm referring to changes or adjustments made by a real acarya. Some believe that for a ten thousand year period that Srila Prabhupada will be the only Acarya, inititating guru and that in the year 3976, for instance, English speakers will read his books exactly as they appeared in English in the 1970's some two thousand years earlier. To me that sounds like some strange fairytale. Just like the fairytale that we fell from our svabhavika rasa in direct Krsna lila in Vraja, which is another prominent fairytale dreamed up by the 'Ten Thousand Year' crowd.

And I don't care what you do and wish you good fortune.

Good fortune in our acarya's conception would be to have a substantial connection with Krsna Consciousness. How can one not care what someone does and then hope that they do the best thing for themselves and others?

That sound mutually contradictory. On the other hand if you're saying something like, "do what you're going to do, but just not in the direct name of Srila Prabhupada", then it makes sense. On the other hand why is it that Krsna Consciousness has to come in a particular way or paticular brand?

It's one of the inherent dangers of "The Ten Thousand Year Acaryaship" Theory: There can be no changes for changing times, changing circumstances and changing places because no one is qualified, nor ever will (at least for ten thousand years) be qualified to do so.

I have to essentially agree with the most Evil Kaisersose in his post #25.

But the entire brahmana/non-brahmana issue, in the context of Gaudiya Saraswat Vaisnava diksa is really a smoke screen to promote an iconoclastic outlook and therefore a much more ambitious agenda. Actually we are comparing apples and oranges, but since we don't even agree on definitions, when we go to grab the oranges they turn into tangerines. So these threads which really appear to be about this subject are just some kind of hodge podge where the protagonists will raise just about any argument to make their point. The non-Saraswat Gaudiyas could just as well debate this with the Saraswat Gaudiyas as both have distinctly different opinions on the subject which the Kaiser, Justin and Raghu seem to be unaware. Each different Vaisnava and even Advaitan sect would have, then again even another opinion. Each side will take the stand that they have the correct interpretation of the Vedic and Puranic concepts, so the arguments will go on without cessation and we can all join in gleefully in an orgy of tale chasing (more canine analogies), an avocation that the good (Evil) Kaiser is so expert at, with all of us idlers who have way too much time on our hands.

Gaudiya saraswat! Where did saraswat come from? Are they undergoing a name change?

You are unprepared. Do your homework and do a search on the internet.

Did the commissioner tell that you personally? I still haven't paid my parking tickets. Can I use your influence to waive them?

The Commissioner announced it at his weekly news conference this morning.

He wants you to play football.

 

What other purpose do you think this forum serves? Do you intend every post to propose something? Some grand proposal for building a temple or are you looking for a proposal of a bailout plan to be drawn here? Discussion forums are simply a method of exhanging opinions. You give yours and others give theirs.

Just like Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur's conception, an acarya could come along in Gaudiya Saraswat line and say, "alright, no more brahmana threads.' Could it be? Will further changes according to time, place and circumstances take place, for sure. But clearly the motive behind the "football playing" of the Kaisers Just-in-time (Johnny-come lately,

Jimmy-Cracked Corn) and the Raghu Spaghetti man are to impune the very motives and integrity of Srila Saraswati Thakur and Srila Prabhupada. Football has its rules and you guys have crossed the lines, and committed personal fouls for which the Big Commissioner in the Sky will lay out heavy fines.

See why one cannot identify Varna by observation?

 

Cheers

I guess he's right, we couldn't find those Kaiser-Krauts anywhere.

 

Besides Raghu's criticisms, what is he proposing?

 

 

 

I gave up on ISKCON.

I don't care if 10,000 ISKCON gurus fall down in the next 100 years

I'm just sittin here in the swamp

dealing with ordinary life and fears

I just worry about the next video and keeping away from them beers

I don't care if 10,000 ISKCON gurus fall down in the next 100 years...

Hey, tell the muslims they are shudras and you will get their version of your varna. Believe me it will not be anything close to the worst nightmare

 

Not according to your own Baladeva. Shudras are exempt from studying scriptures. Now Prabhupada has digressed from his own sampradaya!?

You are talking oranges and apples. What the Gaudiyas are saying is within their definitions. You are using different definitions. What Prabhupada is saying is that a Vaisnava is higher than a brahmana, but still his tendencies in work may still appear to be like that of a vaishya or sudra. But he is a Vaisnava so not an ordinary vaisya or sudra. Then what Vedic texts will he read? Not the four Vedas, but the cream of all Vedic literature, the Srimad Bhagavatam. An ordinary sudra will never have any interest in such a thing because he is just that, an ordinary sudra. You can agree or disagree but then what is your position? If this is true and you are really a 'Justin', then you are outside the system of varnasrama, completely, with far less of a standing than even an ordinary sudra. How could you have any opinion on anything Vedic or even closely related? This is what would be forbidden.

Therefore it is your opinion or even your attempt at an opinion on this subject which is from the Vedic standpoint is completely out of bounds.

The whole world will be full of only brahamanas then. Thats scary dude

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 6.14.5

muktānām api siddhānāḿ

nārāyaṇa-parāyaṇaḥ

sudurlabhaḥ praśāntātmā

koṭiṣv api mahā-mune

O great sage, among many millions who are liberated and perfect in knowledge of liberation, one may be a devotee of Lord Nārāyaṇa, or Kṛṣṇa. Such devotees, who are fully peaceful, are extremely rare.

Fom the Purport by Srila Prabhupada: "Unless the dirt within the core of one's heart is cleansed away, one cannot become a pure devotee. Therefore the word sudurlabhaḥ ("very rarely found") is used in this verse. Not only among hundreds and thousands, but among millions of perfectly liberated souls, a pure devotee is hardly ever found. "

This is also from satsvarupa's diary;

 

 

March 30, 6:30 A.M.

Carrying the body around, piss it, clean it, dress it, struggle to put the wristwatch on, the stockings over cracked toenails, huffing and puffing with a fast-beating heart. Waking the deities, take them out of their beds, wash your eyeglasses—is it time for japa ? Where is your dissatisfied mind going?

 

 

At least he's being honest.. Who else feels like this?

I do sometimes. But isn't this Satsvarupa suppose to be a guru or something? Someone who's suppose to enlighten devotees in their service?

Yes, he's honest on some levels but of course not on all levels. A guru or acarya has to carry themselves in a way that will set an example of devotional service at the standard of his guru. When we think that such a thing is impossible then we settle for less as both the teacher and the student. Then the whole process degrades into imitationism ( or never is lifted out of the imitation level) and we are left with institutionalized, 'taking it cheaply-ism'. If one can't come up to the real standard then don't allow oneself to be advertised as a bonafide guru, don't accept worship for one will go down at very rapid rate. Sometimes you can see the plunge other times the pretenders can disguise it. Its not only sad but its sickening, especially considering that he was so dear to Srila Prabhupada, and the whole crazy thing goes on decade after decade.