Murali_Mohan_das

Your statements regarding Bhaktivinoda's comments on Hanuman led me to my assumptions (not being familiar with the work on which you comment). Just previously, I said, I cannot percieve the intentions of Srila Bhaktivinoda, but here, it might be useful to at least speculate. I believe that Bhaktivinoda, as Srila Sridhar Maharaj has explicitly stated, is begging us to "dive deep into Reality the Beautiful" by pointing out that our goal in studying the shastra is to seek the essence and not to dance around the periphery becoming engrossed in "trivia". As a child, Krishna Book, the story of Prahlad and Hiranyakasipu, etc., *were* my "fairy tales" (in the sense of "bedtime stories"). I wasn't aware that I was learning any philosophical conception, I was enraptured by the high drama. Each year, as I hear the story of Narasimhadev, greater relevance and significance is revealed (hopefully by Mercy and not my own speculation). I have come to see that this is not just "history", but, rather, it is an ever-present condition in the material world. Even now, "global warming" is reminiscent of the heating effect on the *universe* (not just this planet) that Hiranyakasipu's austerities generated. Now, let's not talk about "physical reality" when referring to this great illusion, eh? Yes, so many of the shastric histories are not material and mundane. Don't we get enough mundane stories already? This is not a fault of the shastra, it is their gift--they offer relief from the so-called reality in which we are all suffering. They offer a glimpse into worlds beyond our comprehension.

His intent is beyond my perception. Gurudev, on the other hand, I trust to know his intention, and convey to me as he desires. I don't think your comparison is valid. Nowhere is it said that Lord Sri Krishna has *written* any scriptures, and yet the words of the Lord are there. Bhagavad Gita is told not directly by the Lord Himself, but by Sanjaya to Drtarastra. Do we know the name of the sage who transcribed it? The compilers of the Shastra are divinely inspired. What makes Vedavyas any better than Saccidananda Bhaktivinoda? Let's look at the point you use for comparison though. While we may quibble theologically about whether Guru is God or "as good as God" (is it not another case of acintya beda bed?), functionally, what is the difference? It is clearly stated in shastra that Guru is as good as God. In our devotional lives, then, for all intents and purposes Guru *is* God. Regarding sentiments and deviation, yes, you are right. We must rely on Gurudeva and the Vaishnavas (such as yourself) and our own sincerity to correct us when we deviate and keep us on the path.

Aha! So *this* is where the party is happening! Count me with the "like dhotis" category. In terms of "simple living", I can't imagine anything simpler (or more comfortable) than a dhoti. I've dreamed that, if I were a better (or any sort of) model of a Vaishnava, I would go to work each day in dhoti and kurta (I like the idea of having *one* life and not many different compartments). Since we're quoting song lyrics here. This one by Van Morrison brought me to tears yesterday (yep, I'm a sentimental sahajiya, just like my Dad). I did a quick cover of it last night, but it turned out pretty messy (if spirited). Dweller on the Threshold by Van Morrison I'm a dweller on the threshold And I'm waiting at the door And I'm standing in the darkness I don't want to wait no more I have seen without perceiving I have been another man Let me pierce the realm of glamour So I know just what I am I'm a dweller on the threshold And I'm waiting at the door And I'm standing in the darkness I don't want to wait no more Feel the angel of the present In the mighty crystal fire Lift me up consume my darkness Let me travel even higher I'm a dweller on the threshold As I cross the burning ground Let me go down to the water Watch the great illusion drown I'm a dweller on the threshold And I'm waiting at the door And I'm standing in the darkness I don't want to wait no more I'm gonna turn and face the music The music of the spheres Lift me up consume my darkness When the midnight disappears I will walk out of the darkness And I'll walk into the light And I'll sing the song of ages And the dawn will end the night I'm a dweller on the threshold And I'm waiting at the door And I'm standing in the darkness I don't want to wait no more........><!-- D(["mb","\u003cbr\>\u003cbr\>I'm a dweller on the threshold\n\u003cbr\>And I cross some burning ground\u003cbr\>And I'll go down to the water\u003cbr\>Let the great illusion drown\u003cbr\>\u003cbr\>I'm a dweller on the threshold\u003cbr\>And I'm waiting at the door\u003cbr\>And I'm standing in the darkness\n\u003cbr\>I don't want to wait no more\u003cbr\>\u003cbr\>I'm a dweller on the threshold\u003cbr\>Dweller on the threshold\u003cbr\>I'm a dweller on the threshold\u003cbr\>\n\u003c/span\>\u003c/div\>",0] ); D(["mi",8,3,"112543bc41124a28",0,"0","Maitreya Maziarz","Maitreya","maitreya.maziarz@gmail.com",[ ,[["David","davidlukeabbott@","112543bc41124a28"] ] , ] ,"May 3 (22 hours ago)",["\"David L. Abbott\" \u003cdavidlukeabbott@\>"] , , , ,"May 3, 2007 4:17 PM","Re: Dweller on the Threshold","", ,1,,,"Thu May 3 2007_4:17 PM","On 5/3/07, Maitreya Maziarz \u003cmaitreya.maziarz@gmail.com\> wrote:","On 5/3/07, \u003cb class\u003dgmail_sendername\>Maitreya Maziarz\u003c/b\> <maitreya.maziarz@gmail.com> wrote:","gmail.com",,,"","",0,,"\u003c383278030705031617m6a0a8506i310732f089ca51e4@mail.gmail.com\>",0,,0,"In reply to \"Dweller on the Threshold\"",0] ); //-->.........> I'm a dweller on the threshold And I cross some burning ground And I'll go down to the water Let the great illusion drown I'm a dweller on the threshold And I'm waiting at the door And I'm standing in the darkness I don't want to wait no more I'm a dweller on the threshold Dweller on the threshold I'm a dweller on the threshold

Valuable insights, Prabhu. I pray for the inspiration to learn more about that dear and great person!!

I didn't directly address this point in my earlier response. It's not clear exactly how you came to this conclusion, but, to show correlation between the scripture (shastra) and science is not to devalue the shastra. As pointed out by Bhaktivinoda in a quote recently posted on these forums, our goal lies in the realm of Chit (consciousness). This realm is beyond time and material space, so, when we project that world into our "two dimensional" (to use a film-projection analogy) realm of words, thoughts and time, by necessity the representation will not be full. What am I trying to say? While the shastra no doubt has some literal truth, it cannot contain *all* truth. It is a doorway to the realm of limitless consciousness. What is language, after all, but a model of reality? A word represents a "real" thing (or a "real" concept) in an abstract fashion. As our models become more refined over time (through science, or what have you), why should those who are divinely inspired not use these better models to describe the Ultimate Reality in a way that is more comprehensible to the educated person of his or her day? In a sense, it *is* valuable to accept Shastra literally (under the guidance of a Vaishnava), if only to try to pry our minds free of it's death-grip on the illusion we accept, in our every day lives, as "reality". On the other hand, the Vaishnava, who is being carried by the same transcendent current that has carried the various Vyasdevas, can harmonize the shastra and that small portion of current science which is not complete bull-pucky.

You're too kind, Lowborn Prabhu, to assume I know what you're talking about. I think I follow what you're saying, though much of the history you've presented (very briefly) is new to me, I must say, but is not surprising. While, as Guruvani Prabhu says, it's nice to have citations to which we can refer, I'm willing to accept what you say for the sake of discussion. Well, if there's a "problem" with Srila Bhaktivinoda's pronouncements, I see that the problem is solely mine and not his. Beyond the complete faith that my merciful Gurudeva has placed in him, even with my own myopic vision, Bhaktivinoda's brilliance is blinding. Since his writings are, in complexity and erudition, comparable with any post-graduate thesis, most of us know Srila Bhaktivinoda through his songs, in which the Vaishnava mood is presented in manner of unprecedented beauty. To the degree that none of us know *anything* for a fact, I agree with you, and while his intelligence allowed him to easily grasp much of the contemporary science of his day, the Vaishnava sees Bhaktivonoda's pronouncements as being divinely inspired. So, whether or not Bhaktivinoda's pronouncements are "facts" (as defined by??? The vedas??? science??)), the Vaishnavas see them as Divine Truths. I don't see Bhaktivinoda pretending at anything. His sincerity is utmost. We can rationally and scientifically proclaim so many things, but those proclamations will be fraught with all of the attending baggage of reason and science. Your speculations are reasonable enough, and the rational side of me accepts them. While these are interesting mental exercises, in which way do they help us progress on the path of Bhakti? Perhaps by engaging our mind in thinking of Divine Personalities. But, as aspiring Vaishnavas, do we worship reason? No! In Mahaprabhu, we worship a "madman", who rejected reason (having been the preeminent scholar of His day) to chant and dance in the streets in a state of Divine Intoxication. The Lord is the Divine Autocrat. He is not bound by any "facts". Ultimately, Gaudiya Vaishnavism is a religion of the heart. The mind must be engaged (trained--man-tra: train the mind) or it will get into so much trouble, but we are warned not to be guided by our minds but, rather, by our hearts (which is not to say we are guided by sentimentalism, but by our hearts *true* hankering). Funny you should mention this. When Guruvani-ji recently made some disparaging comments about "iconoclasts", the first persons that came to my mind were Thakur Bhaktivinoda and his most illustrious son. I did not know that Bhaktivinoda was not a born Vaishnava (I'm making that assumption based on what you have presented), or that he had ever taken fish. If this is true, it is so enlivening!!! Through his sincerity, he received limitless mercy! Well, there is only a problem with "equal to if not better than" if we see the writings of Bhaktivinoda as being *apart* from shastra. To the Gaudiya Vaishnavas following in his line, it *is* shastra. What he is presenting is not any different than what has come before (in essence; no doubt we can point out so many superficial differences). The example given is that of a telescope. While, to the observer, the thought might occur: how can putting all these things between you and your object of vision help you to see it more clearly? you should just look at it directly. Of course, to the person looking through the telescope, this is ridiculous thinking. It is only with the aid of the telescope that so many features are visible. Similarly, the writings of the Vaishnava Acharyas are clarifying and amplifying the essence of all shastra. As for "devotees like me", I have no faith whatsoever...not in shastra, not in Guru. What little intelligence I have tells me to cling on to the feet of my Master for dear life. Yes, as scholars and spiritual seekers, we must apply the principle of rationality. As aspiring Vaishnavas we must apply the principle of direct heart-to-heart transmission. "Sri Krsna Samhita is only a breath of Bhaktivinoda" What air do we need besides the breath of Bhakitivinoda??!?!?! It is fully-nourishing and scented with the sweetness of Goloka!

Speaking of fairy tales, have you heard the one that says: it's good to give oxygen to someone whose heart has been stopped for 15 minutes after jumpstarting their heart with electricity? Turns out the oxygen is what *kills* the person. So you see, we cannot be certain about *anything* we *think* we know!!! Just because science (with all it's biases and limitations and constant change) doesn't accept what has been revealed in shastra for millennia, we will dismiss shastra as fairy tales? From yesterday's news: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18368186/site/newsweek/

Well said!!! Wasn't it Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Prabhupada who, after completing parikrama of Vrindavan, lamented that, in all of Vrindavan, he had not found a single Vaishnava?

Way to change the subject, Prabhu!! Of course, you could do a better job of changing the subject. Now your foot is going deeper into your mouth. By your own reasoning, we could say, where did we get this term "Gaudiya Vaishnava"? Krishna Himself did not give this term. Nor did Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Is Krishna Consciousness all just a "concoction" of the Six Goswamis? After all, *they* have given most of the formal practices of Bhakti, and not Sri Krishna or Mahaprabhu. Is that the Vaishnava vision? What you say might be true in a sense, but does it really have any bearing on the topic at hand?

The term "simple living" is it's own definition. It means: don't add unnecessary complexity. No need to throw anything out. It's been said that anything and everything can be used in service to the Lord. Of course, when we are acting in a mood of service, our actions may be vastly different from how we act when we are seeking our own aggrandizement. As for television, phones, and processed food. The trade-offs involved in employing them as they are currently being employed are pretty clear. It can certainly be argued that TV has led to the "dumbing down" of the people who are addicted to it. As for modern dentistry (don't even get me started here), it arose to solve a mostly modern problem--tooth decay. Before folks ate diets high in processed sugars, and white flour, tooth decay was not nearly as prevalent as it is today (kinda like autism). No one is necessarily advocating adopting the lifestyle of a bygone culture (though, one can convincingly argue that many of those "bygone cultures" had higher standards of living than folks living in Westernized countries do today). What's being advocated is a timeless spiritual principle that, in order to make room for spiritual endeavors, our material lives ought to be structured in the simplest way that is practical.

Well, Prabhu, "bhakti-yoga" and "proving the existence of God" are two entirely different things. "Proof" in the scientific sense has a very specific meaning. It involves mathematically rigorous extrapolations based on accepted and established scientific principles, and, where possible, experimental confirmation of the principle's validity. I still insist that proving God's existence via the scientific method is not possible and defy anyone to prove me wrong. To the Vaishnava, there is no question of proving the existence of God, the Vaishnava sees God *everywhere* (so, of course, there is no question of "believing blindly"). Right. Scientists have no evidence (as defined by science) to show that there is an Intelligent Designer (ID) at play in the universe. Where is *your* scientific evidence? Of course, to a good scientist, the lack of evidence is not proof to the contrary, but, simply, a lack of evidence. Frankly, I fail to see how this example applies to the question of the scientific proof of the existence of an ID. Furthermore, as pointed out by Srila Prabhupada many times (and you yourself), our senses are not to be trusted. It's funny you should use the example of sweetness, because Srila Prabhupada liked to cite the example of jaundice: http://vedabase.net/noi/7/ So, Srila Prabhupad and the scientists tell us the same things: do not trust your senses. Scientists use the best measurement tools available to them, but they have learned not to blindly trust their measurements, since tools made by imperfect hands often have imperfections. Here's an example from the Anthropogenic Global Warming discussion: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/ocean-cooling-not/ Basically, a new array of measurment buoys were placed at various places in the ocean. After a couple of years, the data from these buoys was indicating that the oceans were *cooling* and not warming as the scientists expected. After reviewing all of the involved components, a sensor was found to be defective. I see stories like this all the time. Science is anything but perfect. However, most of the scientists I have known have been very humble, dedicated people. While there are, no doubt, many arrogant scientists, I find it is in the media that science tends to take on a hysterical tone. Now, this is nitpicking, but spiritual energy is most definitely *not* anti-matter. Anti-matter is also material, *not* spiritual. Spritual energy is exactly that, spiritual. It transcends the mundane. It is supra-mundane. You can say that Krishna Consciousness (KC) is a scientific method (as Srila Prabhupada certainly did). But, in what manner is it scientific? Wouldn't you say, KC, is a process by which, if one follows diligently, a reproduceable result is obtained? That's the basis of science: the ability to reproduce a certain effect. However, as pointed out in Nectar of Instruction, we *cannot* assume we have the taste for the ultimate sweetness. The term "bona fide" is bandied about a lot by the aspiring Vaishnavas, but what does it mean literally? Literally it means "good faith". It does *not* mean "authorized by God", "infallible" or any other such thing. Initially, in our inquiries, whether they be spiritual or scientific we must accept a higher authority on "good faith" since we lack the vision, taste, and insight to comprehend the spiritual, scientific, or mathematical principles they are teaching. In time, based on the results we get, we will see whether our faith was well-placed or not. In time our understanding will grow, perhaps by our own efforts, but, in the case of spirit, through the Mercy of the Lord. Still, whether it's science or religion, faith is required, Suchandra Prabhu. This is already a long post, but I hope to post something about just what Sri Krishna's role in creation is. It is very nicely presented in Brahma Samhita and elsewhere, and should further illuminate this topic. Gaura Hari Bol!!! Jaya Gurudev!!

Daniel Maziarz is my father. He was initiated as Dharmadhyaksa Dasa by Srila AC Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada. You can find him in the Conversations. He wrote a few articles for Back to Godhead, and was a very active campus preacher in the 70's. In the 80's he edited and co-wrote a large coffee-table type book called "Vaishnava India" with Geary Sheridan and other devotees. Dharma, as he is known by his friends, has been living near the New Dwaraka temple in L.A. for about ten years now, and should be a familiar face at Govinda's. The "Essene School of Life" is a non-profit organization that Dharma set up to undertake distribution (independent of other organizations) of spiritual principles to interested parties (mostly New Agers). It has been mostly dormant for the last several years. Please keep my father in your prayers, Prabhus. Currently he is very depressed and is suffering a crisis of faith due to the failure of various materialistic endeavors which he had undertaken. Despite his self-proclaimed status as a "sahajiya", his heart is good, and I know, at his core, he desires to serve the Vaishnavas. I'm amazed that, this small gesture he made many months ago, when he was in better spirits, is still giving some pleasure to the Vaishnavas. I just left a phone message for him expressing my amazement. All Glories to the Assembled Devotees!!!!

I haven't heard that women shouldn't visit the temple when they are menstruating (as Ms. Pitts answered), but I do believe women do not usually cook for or offer puja to the Deities when menstruating (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

That's a fascinating article about insect flight, Suchandra Prabhu, and, while I agree with you for the most part, the argument that our universe could not have become what it is simply by chance is easily refuted logically (if not spiritually). If you're willing to concede that there exists a finite probability that a particular natural process (a process which is possible) will occur in a given period of time, then, over an infinite period of time, that process is *guaranteed* to happen. If you grant (ignoring the soul for a moment) that life arises from series of mechanical processes, each with a finite probability of occurring, then, over an infinite amount of time So, when you use the "1 million years" figure (I don't know where you got that, the Earth is estimated to be 4.55 billion years. According to this: http://geol.queensu.ca/museum/exhibits/archean/archean.html it is believed that there has been life on Earth for 3.5 billion years.), that is not really fair, because, it does not take into account the entire universe. 3.5 billion years is a long time. Then, consider how many innumerable planets there are and the fact that, according to scientific principles there is no beginning or end to time. So, it's altogether plausible that, after innumerable failures, on our planet, the dice rolled just right and here we are. This particular argument that you present has been a favorite of aspiring Vaishnavas for a long while (I remember it from my childhood in ISKCON). Unfortunately, it's a very hollow argument that is best abandoned lest reasonable folks assume the person bandying the argument about is a fool (as you blithely dismiss the scientists as being fools). While I whole-heartedly would agree with the assertion that way too much faith is placed in science these days, to the point where it has become a religion of sorts. Scientific principles have been twisted and abused in the same manner as the priciples of capitalism and communism, and, in fact, there is no "pure science". Special interests, whether private industry or government exert way too much influence over the scientific process for it to be considered unbiased. That said, science is a *tool* (or should be), and not a blueprint for living. One cannot deny the results (both beneficial and harmful) of science. Science has facilitated so many things (including spreading the Mercy of Mahaprabhu), so what is the point of denigrating or condescending to the scientists? Simply put, faith is required at some point. One cannot logically prove the existence of God (at least not without granting many assumptions). In the logical paradigm, the world most certainly *could* have arisen by chance. However, to the Vaishnava, "not a blade of grass moves without the will of the Lord". The Vaishnava sees the Lord as the "Cause of all Causes".

Out of curiosity, what would a Tantrik do that is more effective than mantras, pujas, etc.?

Sorry to say, but this is not what *would* happen, this is exactly what *did* happen. If you study your Gaudiya Vaishnava history, you'll see that, by the time of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, Gaudiya Vaishnavism was "in a shambles". Things *had* gotten distorted to the point where the birthplace of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu had been lost. It was Bhaktivinode who reformed Gaudiya Vaishnavism, rediscovered the birthplace of Mahaprabhu, etc., decrying the numerous impostors. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta carried on his father's transcendental activities. In fact, one could say he "innovated" in terms of the nature and role of sannyas in the Gaudiya tradition. As for the disciplic succession, it is not a list of "begats" such as one might find in the Bible. If you look at any of the versions of the Gaudiya sampradaya, you will notice chronological gaps, and large ones. The sampradaya isn't a formality, it is a spiritual current (as noted by a previous poster). Who says what the disciplic succession is? Not you or I, Prabhu. Gurudev says. Like I said, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta "innovated". While I'd be the first to admit that his innovations were not philosophical innovations, but adjustments to external factors for the sake of preaching, caution is urged in just what we drop like a hot potato. At one point (before Kali Yuga), so many austerities were required to make spiritual advancement. Then, though the mercy of the Lord, the yuga-dharma of Hari Nama Sankirtan was given. The wonders, glory, and mercy of the Lord are infinite, and, thus, ever-fresh. But, Ching Hai has disciples all over the world. Does that mean she meets the other criteria? How many disciples did Gaura Kishor Das Babaji have (I believe the correct answer is "one")? Does that have any relevance as to his worth to the Gaudiya Vaishnavas? Exactly. This is where you trip yourself up. One can perfectly maintain appearances and still be a snake. One can expertly quote shastra and still be a sense-enjoyer. Just because somebody says things that *seem* (to us with our imperfect vision) to correlate with the teachings of the previous acharyas, doesn't mean that they are fully realized. Sorry to nit-pick here (though it's what I do best), but one does not offer prasadam. One offers bhoga to the Lord and gratefully takes the Lord's remnants as prasadam. Ultimately, we are all relying on the mercy of the Lord for guidance and shelter.

Thank you Prabhu for your merciful words. It appears I have John Kerry's gift for communication and being misunderstood. I had cited my Gurudeva's recitation of Gita Govinda (which, it has been clarified for all, he learned as a boy (his father (if my porous memory correctly serves) was a noted (in the region) professional singer)) in Sanskrit for his non-Sanskrit speaking disciples as an example of his mood of *caution*. It is my offense to have presented it in a way that you could misinterpret as a "my guru can do, but others can not", when that was the exact opposite of my intention. So very true. I still fail to see how, in this particular thread, I subtly inferred (or grossly declared) that anyone's guru is a "cheap imitation". When I said I was not qualified to judge, I meant exactly that. I am not qualified to judge my *own* Guru's qualifications, and, it is not his qualifications that led me to seek his shelter. I found myself *charmed* by Gurudeva's sweet, humble nature during a time when I was *desperate* for relief from my miseries (that time was particularly desperate though, certainly, from day to day, I cling to "sanity" with my fingernails). Gurudeva's more intimate servitors might have a different perspective, but I have seen no evidence of any fence-building on the part of Srila Govinda Maharaja. Rather (and let me follow his example), his example is one of fidelity. He is whole-heartedly focusing on nourishing and maintaining the mission of his Gurudev to the exclusion of all other considerations. Once again, please do not confuse Gurudeva with me. I do *not* use his language as my own (a direct quote is a direct quote, paraphrasing is paraphrasing, and I try to qualify my speculations as such and not state them as fact). Citing Param-Gurudeva's use of the "Fools rush in..." quote was not directed at anybody in particular, but to illustrate a principle. How the principle is applied is left as an exercise to the reader. While I might make bold declarations for the sake of rhetoric, I certainly hope my inner motivation is discourse and not propaganda (my conscious motive certainly is not to propagandize). I welcome corrections from such kind souls as yourself. In these discussions, I certainly have gained valuable perspective and read relevant scriptural references offered by others for my benefit. For the record, I now wish I could remove the glib Monty Python quote from the opening post of this thread, but have found that I cannot do so with my current priveleges. Despite being a slave to my mind, I'm hoping I can take my heart's advice to sit on my tongue for a while (maybe a long while), take the medicine of Krishna Nam and sadhu-sanga, and make some atonement for my offenses. Yours worthlessly, --MMd

If memory serves, Jaya and Vijaya had a choice in their punishment. They could take X (where X is much larger than 3) number of births as the devotee of the Lord, or the 3 births as demons. For Jaya and Viyaja, it was a no-brainer. They wanted to serve their pennance and return to Vaikuntha as quickly as possible.

Yes, Prabhu!! You are so correct. Really, I should sign each of my posts with a disclaimer that I am a hypocrite who does not follow his Gurudeva's instructions while begging others to do so. The title I chose for this thread applies equally to those rushing into reading intimate pastimes as it does to me having the audacity to try to shed light on the matter with my own speculative comments, and quotes from Guru Varga which I can barely comprehend (if at all). Surely, prefacing a quote from Guru Maharaj with an off-color quote from Monty Python (it *is* an illustrative quote, is it not (if glib) ?) is offensive, and I shall get the appropriate reaction. If Gurudev was present before me (or the next time I have his darshan), perhaps I would be blessed by a thrashing. Thank you for your kind and gentle correction, and for making clear to all on this forum that I am *not* representative of the quality of my superior Godbrothers and Godsisters, and do not in any way embody my Gurudeva's mood of devotion. Gurudeva's mood is so sweet and magnanimous, while I am so bitter, envious, and a slave to my mind. Jaya Gurudeva!!! Jaya Gaura Bhakta Vrinda!!!

Thank you for making that abundantly clear (his recitation being in Sanskrit). I thought I had done so, but, obviously, I left much room for misunderstanding. Also, thanks for clarifying that Gurudeva learned Gita Govinda as a child and not during his service to his Guru Maharaja. This was not clear to me.

Thank you, Muralidhar for providing a more perfect answer to the Guest's questions than I ever could! Of course, as I am here at work, avoiding cleaning the pots and thowing out the garbage, let me post a further quote from Prapanna-Jivanamrita to further illustrate the mood of Param-Gurudev. From (thank you again Prabhu): http://www.mandala.com.au/prapanna/preface.html#TWO So, one could certainly (mis)interpret this to mean "yes, take the 'total risk' of reading the intimate details (as service to Krishna)", if not for the qualifying "According to the intensity of surrender". The mood of surrender is: You give me what I need; you know better than I do what will be my proper postion and engagement.

Simple. The "Real Thing" is that which is given directly by the Lord and His Representative. "Cheap imitation" is that which comes from our own speculation, concoction, misinterpretation, etc. No need to twist my words. I hoped my meaning was abundantly clear--I am not qualified to say who is qualified and who is not. If you are asking for my own worthless opinion, I am inclined to believe that Sripad Narayan Maharaj *is* who his disciples have faith he is, regardless of any special rasa he might have with the Guru Varga from whom I seek shelter (and, really, this is nothing I should mention, given that I've never heard Gurudev make mention of this). So many wonderful Vaishnava well-wishers, "Uncles", "Aunts", friends, etc. from my childhood and beyond have taken shelter of Narayan Maharaj. Surely, the Lord is protecting and nurturing them through His servant. As for my Gurudeva's qualification to recite Gita Govinda in Sanskrit to his Sanskrit-illiterate Western disciples, I have no doubt whatsoever. His Gurudev invested all of his faith, insight, and potency in Srila Govinda Maharaja. In everything he does, Gurudev is the perfect model of a Vaishnava. His study of Shastra was directly supervised by his Gurudev. He read what Param-Gurudev instructed him to read, and, in cases, heard Shastra directly from Srila Sridhar Maharaj (without reading first). Narayan Maharaj was brought by Anadi Prabhu into the conversation from which this thread was born, as being the source of his own greed for hearing the intimate pastimes. Certainly, I could have ignored his mention, and proceeded strictly discussing the subject matter, but I wished to offer no disrespect by ignoring. I hope I have offered no disrespect by mentioning him without adequate glorification. That said, let my prayer to Gurudev and Thakur Bhaktivinode be to protect me from sectarianism!! Dayal Nitai!! To add something new to the discussion: the pastimes of Radha-Krishna and the Gopis are eternally ongoing, are they not? As they are eternally ongoing, are they not also eternally fresh and new? Despite the transcendental nature of Shastra, while it can give *entry* to the eternal pastimes (lila) of the Lord, can they contain the totality of the lila? Yet, if the Lord chooses to, all can be revealed to us, yes?

Ha ha ha!! That's rich, Prabhu! Personally, the only aspirant I will label a "sahajiya" is myself. Of course, my birth father is a self-proclaimed sahajiya... No doubt, I am a phony hypocrite, but, Gurudev is always extolling us to seek The Real Thing, and not to be satisfied with cheap imitation. The quote you provide appears to be from: Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers http://www.krishna.com/e-books/Perfect_Questions_Perfect_Answers.pdf In the context of the conversation, it is clear to see that Srila Prabhupad is relating the intimate lila to demonstrate the nature of the Divine Autocrat--He can do as He pleases, and His pleasure is the nourishment for all that is. There is nothing salacious or cheap about this account. As Anadi Prabhu points out, Vaishnavas progress at various paces. It is nobody's business (except Gurudev) to say who is qualified to hear/read the intimate pastimes. However, as Param-Gurudev says, how can we know the Lord and His pastimes if He will not reveal them to us?

Joy!! Thank you for pointing this out Muralidhar Prabhu!! I guess I did not look far enough in the Google results. Perhaps this will save me a lot of typing in the future (though transcribing the words of the Master is a joyful toil). Dandavat pranamas!

Some people may say that, but I did not. As Anadi Prabhu pointed out in the previous thread, Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu places the attachment of the Gopis for Krishna in the highest position. About that there is no debate. All Gaudiya Vaishnavas loudly proclaim this. In your quote, Srila Prabhupad is talking about *more* intimate things, but, really, he's is talking about the playful flirting of the Supreme and His Consort, and it is to illustrate a philosophical point. This is still not a recitation of Gita Govinda (in English; once my Gurudev recited Gita Govinda for some Western disciples saying: I only do this because you do not understand the words), or the Tenth Canto Rasa Lila depictions. I'm not saying Srila Prabhupada never did reveal these things. I honestly would like someone to bring forth evidence of such an occurence if it exists. I simply have never heard of such a thing happening.