Murali_Mohan_das

I said it was a dangerous question. Unlike you, I don't claim to have any answers for it. I've shared some of my more outrageous and blasphemous musings with you in private. In the end, it makes no difference in my mind if those about whom I muse have engaged in the activities in which I crazily suspect they might have engaged. Pure is pure.

I was thinking about this last night as I lay in bed. If the acharya is truly on the plane of Raganuga (spontaneous) bhakti, and is performing every action in a mood of service to the Lord, who is to say that such an acharya is wrong to engage in intimacy with a disciple? Perhaps the Lord is enjoying via His pure servant? Who are we to say?

On the contrary, you have helpfully found quotes which *confirm* that the mind (the subtle body) survives the death of the body. Thanks!!! The "subtle body" is still material, it is not our "spiritual body".

I'm truly laughing out loud!! Good one!!

It's true that the mind is temporary, but it certainly *can* survive the body and accompany the soul to the next body. This is pretty basic reincarnation theory, which is evidenced by anecdotal evidence of children speaking languages to which they have never been exposed, recognizing places and objects from their previous lives, etc. It also can explain why people raised in almost identical environments can demonstrate such widely differing predelictions.

No game. True mercy. If our mundane wealth is stripped away and we are sincere, we will seek our spiritual wealth--service. Ultimately, *all* happiness, whether we call it "material" or "spiritual" is coming from the Lord. Being a recent Gayatri initiate, I've been meditating on why the final Gayatri mantra I was given is, at least on the surface, a prayer to Kama Dev, the God of "lust". It seems strange, unless we gain some insight into the true nature of lust.

I've brought up in other discussions the fact that John Dewey and his colleagues at Columbia's (my alma mater) Teacher's College went to Germany during the 1930's to study the German system of education which facilitated the rise of the Nazis with its emphasis on obedience and conformity. It was this system that they tried (with success) to adopt and spread throughout the U.S.A. However, in my actual college experience, I found most of the professors to be humble, open-minded seekers of the truth. Sure, there were some teachers who exhibited the symptoms of dogmatism, but they were the exception. The problem certainly lies as much with insincere students as with the teachers. Even at an Ivy League university, so many of my classmates seemed more interested in achieving social status and material wealth than indulging any true sense of curiosity or wonder. To that extent, it was in their best interest to figure out what the professors wanted to hear and to parrot that back to them. In my own case, I feel that my time in college served to broaden my intellectual horizons and make me more of a "free-thinker". Of course, you are free to think differently.

"Gaura Nataraj" refers to Sriman Mahaprabhu.

Ancient, Hebrew, from what I understand, was written without vowels. Today, some dots above (or is it below) the Hebrew are used to indicate vowels (from what I hear). One consequence of this is that "Yahweh" is a best guess pronounciation of "YHVH" or "YHWH". Without the diacritic marks, KRSNA simply makes no sense (since it could be pronounced at least 10 different ways in Sanskrit, "kirzna", "krizna", "kirshna", "kirshna" (with a palatal "sh"), "krishna", "krishna" (with a palatal "sh"), "krishnaah" (long a), etc.). In my arrogant opinion, if there aren't diacritics, it ought to be "Krishna".

Well said!! I almost got kicked out of a college class for challenging Freud's notion that the split between the conscious, unconscious, and superconscious was permanent (if arbitrary). I cling to the belief that we can be one person, not three-in-one. Sorry for the jackass comment on the other thread. Your heart is good (certainly better than mine).

I might have gotten the details mixed up. My memory is still very poor.

I'm pretty sure he's a different devotee. This Sarvabhavana Dasa is a disciple of Srila Bhaktivendanta Swami Prabhupada. His service has been more involved with the actual printing (as in operating the presses) of later editions of the books of Srila Sridhar Maharaja, and the books of Srila Govinda Maharaja.

As Prabhu explains, such was his humility, that Lochan Das Thakur's disciple (perhaps his *only* disciple) secretly cleaned the place where his Gurudev used to pass stool for close to a year before Sri Lochan Das discovered what had been happening and, after much pleading by the disciple, initiated him. Even then, Lochan Das sent his disciple to study with Jiva Goswami.

I'm glad to see you are able to rise above those of us with petty differences and axes to grind. This is a trenchant analysis.

So true!! I pray the day soon comes when I will be able to set aside my pride and truly follow the instructions and example of Srila Gurudev!!! Dandavata Pranamas!! Ananta Koti Vaishnava Vrinda Ki Jai!!!

You are right, Pita-ji. I let my emotions get the best of my reason. Thank you for your kind correction!!

Thank God!!! Toying with you is just much too easy. It's not even fun.

Oh, so you know Prabhupada well-enough to know what would offend him? You sure seem offended by me. I wish I could say I'm sorry for that.

Near the end of the class, I ask Sarvabhavana Prabhu about the term "bona fide" and its literal meaning "good faith". Prabhu replies that "good faith" means that a "bona fide" guru will not cheat us.

You find the statements offensive, therefore you are offended. QED.

There are college professors who spend their whole careers studying the Vaishnava scriptures while continuing to unashamedly live like mlecchas. They happily lecture classrooms full of students about the inner meaning of Vedanta with great eloquence and erudition while conveying nothing of the true sentiment found in the scripture. You aren't much different from those pontificators, are you (except you are not nearly as eloquent)? Your learning and supposed conviction are worth nothing (actually, less than nothing) if you try to cheat others by encouraging them to follow your foolish example.

To the extent that he is surrendered, Sri Krishna has used theist to spread His mercy. To the extent that he still serves his own mind, theist is a pompous windbag.

It's amazing how much a period can change the meaning, isn't it? See that period between "Bhagavad-gita" and "And". In my view it doesn't belong there (theologically and grammatically). This is a transcript of a conversation. It better reads, "You can associate with Krishna by reading Bhagavad-gita, and [associating with] these saintly persons--they have given their explanations, comments" The fact that you are so easily offended, theist, is a strong indication that you may have *theoretically* accepted Jagganatha and Mahaprabhu in your mind, but that They do not yet rule your heart. If you think one can easily become Krishna-conscious by reading books and listening to guidance from within without associating with the saintly persons (however you chose to define or redefine them) but studying particle physics at a PhD. level alone is impossible, then your vision is indeed very narrow. There is only *one* subject, Krishna. The scriptures and the textbooks and the saints all point to Him.

Sarvabhavana Prabhu begins the class by answering a question regarding Sri Lochan Das Thakur, whose Appearance Day, will be celebrated on Wednesday, January 9, 2008. This glorification leads naturally to the nature of Sri Guru. Later, Prabhu humbly answers questions regarding staying faithful to one's initiating spiritual master, whether books can substitute for the direct association of the spiritual master, and the distinctions between kanistha, madhyama, and uttama adhikari (levels of spiritual advancement). Embedded: <embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=2426065609996619206&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed> Link: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2426065609996619206

Does anybody know of a good home-study PhD. program in particle physics? I've been thinking about going back to school. If you don't like the term "living guru", how about "personal guru"? Please don't tell me the books are a person (except in the general sense that everything is a person).