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.

Why would some one come up with such an erroneous conclusion? The main reason is that they have no idea what is raganuga bhakti. Raga means transcendental attachment, as experienced by the ragatmika devotees in Vraja dham such as Nanda, Yasoda, Subal, Sridama, Lalita, Vishaka and so on. When upon hearing about the attachment these eternal associates or parishads have for Sri Krsna from the mouths of pure devotees, if one develops a spontaneous attraction or lobha, hankering or greed for such attachment then one is fit to be a follower (anugua) of the ragatmika devotees and is therefore qualified to become a raganuga. The devotees of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu coming in the line of Srila Rupa Goswami are a special kind of raganuga known as Rupanuga. Why would an acarya in the line of Sri Rupa Manjari act in the purusha bhava or mentality of a male enjoyer? BTW, spontaneity is a secondary characteristic of raganuga bhakti, not primary. It is not just a spontaneous desire to do service but rather to do service in the footsteps of the eternal service of Krsna in particular rasa.

No other man can rule on who can/shall have sex.

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?

One becomes a ghost when the subtle body acts without the help of the instrumental gross body. . . .

The living entity is bound by the subtle body, consisting of the mind, intelligence and false ego.

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!!

 

Reintarnation!!!!

 

 

"Mind dies with the body." I don't know where you got that. Go ask your guru to explain it to you.

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.

Can't believe Krishna could be so cruel, giving too many sorrows to devotees. Maybe this is why the so-called demons hate Him, it's because they find this to be a fallacy in the Lord. So it may not be blind hatred. Funnily, I rarely come across devotees who're blessed with wealth, health etc. OTOH, Krishna often rewards his haters with all these things. What sort of game is this?

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.

Nataraj – king of dancers (not sure, maybe this pertains to Lord Shiva)

"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).

The unconscious or subconscious just refers to levels of the mind that we are not consciously aware of. Yes this exists. We are only conscious of the tip of iceberg when it comes to the mind.

 

The mind houses your past life experiences and memories in the same way it houses the impressions from your early childhood which you have consciously forgotten.

 

These impressions are called samskaras. If there was no continuity of the mind from one birth to another then we would all take birth with a blank slate but we see that doesn't happen.

 

When we leave this body it is the subtle body that we leave in and it is the nature of that subtle body that determines our next desitnation. The mind does not die when the body dies. Now picture how many births and deaths our minds have experienced and impressions and memories from all of them have left their mark.

 

This all makes up what we presently call the sub- conconsious.

 

Sub meaning below the surface.

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

I liked that story of cleaning the place secretly, also. Narottam das thakura did the same thing for his guru maharaja Lokanatha Goswami.

 

Jai Lochan das Thakura! Jai Chaitanya Mangal!

Radhe Radhe

 

Thanks for that Muralimohandas. I really like that story about Sri Lochandas' disciple sweeping the area discreetly.

 

Is this Sarvabhanadas the translator of Brhat Mrdanga's Jaiva Dharma?

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.

I have been following the guru debate within our Movement for quite a few years now. Since I am involved in a day to day contact with new and old devotees, as well as with people who are simply curious about our Movement, I would like to share a few observations related to this debate.

It seems to me that the tone, content, and form of the guru debate within our Movement are directly leading to an overall devaluation of the concept of guru in general, as well as to a marked decline in overall faith in the Krsna Consciousness process as presented to us by Srila Prabhupada.

Of course other events, such as the numerous fall downs of Iskcon gurus or their abuses of power, did not help in that regard. Still, the way we discuss the guru issue in our Movement has a lot to do with how people perceive the legitimacy of our Movement, as well as how such regrettable falldowns are understood.

Seems to me that here are four basic camps in this discussion. What are their "sins" in this debate? One camp (GBC) usually presents a patronizing attitude mixed with witholding relevant information, or an outright misrepresentation of the facts. The ritvik camp "sins" are personified by "Final Order thumpers" who basically call anybody involved in the current Iskcon power system a crook, traitor, liar, and pretender. These are the two main camps. Third camp consists of ex-Iskcon devotees who took shelter of Gaudiya Vaishnavas from post-Gaudiya Matha organizations or from traditional Gaudiya parivars. The fourth camp is rank and file devotees who are just confused about this issue.

The good news is that despite all the accusations, mud slinging, shoddy logic, out of context, twisted and/or contradictory quotations often used in these guru debates, people are still interested in hearing from a living spiritual authority.

I definitely agree with you Muralimohandas. And to add, self-deception is the wost kind of deception.<!-- / message -->

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!!

Then why are you toying with someone who is obviously old enough to be your father, senior to you, formally initiated or not. Theist served ISKCON directly during Srila Prabhupada's manifest lila but did not take initiation for he felt unqualified. He also was directly in Srila Prabhupada's presence. Now he feels connected to Srila Prabhupada through his books. In my opinion, he does overly stress the books over connection with a living sadhu, but I certainly don't believe that he has nothing in his hand from his experience. I just don't see how creating a heated argument that degrades into name calling can further the cause of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's Sankirtan Movement. We are all still conditioned souls who tend towards attachment, hate and envy. We need to observe these things within ourselves and refuse to act on them (especially hate and envy) otherwise our minds are completely out of control and there is then no question of actually practicing Krsna Consciousness to even the smallest extent. If we are to be practitioners then even posting on this website will be a service or seva. Aparadha or offences can also be seva aparadha, what to speak of Vaisnava aparadha.

And thus ends this exchange.

Thank God!!!

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

Offensive to PRABHUPAD you dolt!

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.

I stopped reading after these offensive statements.

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.

Who said I was offended. I am just annoyed at the obstinate stupity. I think you should get a job with the BBT rewriting Srila Prabhupada's conversations. I don't think they have done that yet and you possess the arrogance to take the job on.

The contribution Thiest has done on these threads are wonderdul. I know of people who have read his comments, started reading Prabhupada's books and have moved into the ISKCON Temple.

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?

Prabhupada: Yes. You can associate with Krishna by reading Bhagavad-gita. And these saintly persons, they have given their explanations, comments. So where is the difficulty? Everyone is helping you.-conv. 1974

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).