Bhakta Harry

Srila Prabhupada is a bona-fide guru and he advised some of his disciples as follows.... Who are these unqualified sadhus? This is of course another misinformed ant-ritvik diatribe from the GM propaganda machine. Srila Prabhupada himself said that he was "THE acarya of the present Gaudiya-sampradaya." So why blame the ritviks? Well that statement would be correct, if ISKCON was not so corrupt.

It is a fact that there have been many active pedophiles in ISKCON. So are we to proclaim that everyone in ISKCON is a pedophile? Similarly there may be some who adhere to the ritvik conclusions who blaspheme "great Vaisnavas outside of ISKCON". Are we acting truthfully to suggest that they all do? If you can be more specific by supplying details of any alleged blasphemy then we can discuss on that basis.

Some points to consider regarding the validity of this post. 1) It is not on the vedabase, so there are immediate doubts as to the value of this conversation. 2) It was spoken in Bengali. Thus we are depending on a translation by HH Bhakti Caru Swami who is not a very reliable translator as the following explains. 3) The poster of this conversation has given it the title "Prabhupada Said Srila Sridhar Maharaj Should Give Guidance To His Disciples." However when we read the conversation we see no such thing. What it actualy says is, "so if you are there, then they can get some guidance." So it is clearly not the same. The poster has obvious difficulties with his reading of the English language. Or the poster is also pushing an agenda and is unable to present the facts in a straightforward manner. It is thus safe to conclude this is another phony propaganda effort from the Sridarittes. Who seem to think it is essential to propagate that HH BR Sridar Maharaja & Srila Prabhupada were always boosom buddies. Irrespective of the truth.

It is true that Srila Prabhupada did not try and fix the Gaudiya Matha, but just formed his own new society called ISKCON. This analogy however fails due to one big difference - Srila Prabhupada is the Acarya (mahabhagavat), and therefore can set up his own society, as acaryas do - but we are not acaryas, only disciples, and therefore must simply try and work under the parameters given by Srila Prabhupada. One of these parameters as given by Srila Prabhupada, shortly before he departed, was in relation specifically to the situation we find ourselves in now: Since many in ISKCON have decided to 'pose as Guru' and been 'ready to jump', the sincere devotees have been forced to provide the 'vigilant observation' through their writings, and also provide a 'strong management' by reviving a real ISKCON based on Srila Prabhupada's directives. Have you read these magazines? If so, be so kind as to post some examples of this alleged nonsense. That way we can all see who is the real nonsense. I'll let the editor of the magazine answer that point. This is from issue 7.

Please post examples of my criticizm. If you read your post again you also wrote .... "It's funny how you vehemently argue to establish the association of Srila Sridhar Maharaja as undesired because Srila Prabhupada 'instructed' as such" Here you criticize my method of arguing without substantiation. Thus it is deemed as critical. This is a very poor speculation and as such is against the 4 regs ie: mental speculation. He may have been a pure devotee but he was not qualified to be an acarya. Who are you to judge how many pure devotee's Srila BhaktiSidhanta Saraswati produced by his preaching?

There are many reasons as to why people are introduced to temples or institutions. One of which you have mentioned above. However without the blessings of a bona-fide spiritual master it is very difficult to overcome our own anarthas. Your question in relation to ISKCON; is such that some of these "institutional policies" are in direct conflict with the instructions of the founder of the institution. Those who are aware of this and who are sincere about pleasing the spiritual master by following his instructions have no option but to preach the truth of the situation to those concerned. This means fighting as Srila Prabhupada states: Of course there are differing degrees of purity. Strict sadhana without the blessings of the guru will not give one purity. Sadhana involves chanting the holy names; one of the offenses in chanting the holy names is to disobey the orders of the guru. So how can one become pure by participating in the disobedience of the gurus order? On the contrary; it is the institution which has become revolting.

So does Srila Prabhupada as I quoted in my last post. Your example of Hiranyakasipu is a very extreme form of tapasya, is it not? Of course if you are a devotee on par with Yamunācārya then you don’t require to practice brahmācārya separately. As at that level it is part of ones consciousness. All others have to go through the brahmācārya ashram for training in the principals. Thats why Srila Prabhupada introduced the brahmācārya ashram. If it was automatic as you suggest then there would be no need for such an ashram in ISKCON. So your statement posted on 10-04-2006 "There's no need of practising brahmacari in this age" is not supported by Srila Prabhupada:

Yes I really have little intrest in HH BR Sridar Maharaja, however when his followers make unsubstantiated claims like Sridas has on this thread like this: This is lies - as I have pointed out in a previous post and as Srila Prabhupada has said in the quote above

Thank-you for your erudite points. However my purpose in quoting this has been misunderstood, so I shall post some quotes to clarify my point.

What is common about this reply and ones similar, is that the focus is always on what seems is best for me, not what is best for Srila Prabhupada. Yet Srila Prabhupada tells us that: So therefore the correct mentality should be; what will satisfy Srila Prabhupada the most at this time? Trying to save his mission from total failure, or seeing to my own personal comforts & safety?

My point to Suchandra was: "Thank you for your comments. However you have not given any evidence to support your above statement." This was in relation to his statement "There's no need of practising brahmacari in this age" He then posted the following as evidence supporting his above statement. "Thus a Vaishnava automatically becomes a brahmana. This idea is also supported by Sanatana Gosvami in his book Hari-bhakti-vilasa, which is the Vaishnava guide. Therein he has clearly stated that any person who is properly initiated into the Vaishnava cult certainly becomes a brahmana, as much as the metal known as kamsa (bell metal) is turned into gold by the mixture of mercury. A bona fide spiritual master, under the guidance of authorities, can turn anyone to the Vaishnava cult so that naturally he may come to the topmost position of a brahmana." I am such a fool that I am unable to comprehend the relevance of his quote to his statement. However fortunately I was able to find many clear quotes such as the following which explain the importance of brahmacarya. </O:P

Of course by criticizing me for criticizing, you are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of, and thus your charge is self-contradictory. It is nonsense as soon as it is made. If it is wrong to criticize then why criticize me? All my words are backed by quotes from Srila Prabhupada. Next let us assume that your complaint is correct. Then we should ask if the criticizm is correct and truthful? To this the answer must be yes, because if the criticizm was wrong, then you would not bother to criticize me for simply criticizing! You would actually criticize me for telling lies. Therefore know that whenever someone criticizes someone else for the fact that they “only criticize”, this is another way of saying: “I cannot criticize WHAT you say, therefore I will criticize you FOR saying it!” On further examination, we find that all preaching is constructive criticizm: e.g. Maya bad – but Krishna good. Some are similarly criticizing constructively: e.g. Unqualified gurus bad – Srila Prabhupada good. Ultimately if you think about it, all of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, are basically exposing all the impostors that exist in the material world, and showing us the reality, distinguishing truth from illusion. satyam bruyat priyam bruyat

Thank you for your comments. However you have not given any evidence to support your above statement.

A very nice post by krsna, thank-you:) The following essay may also be helpful in understanding the importance of practicing brahmacari. Chastity, continence, or brahmacharya, is one of the five moral values, yamas, prescribed as preliminary disciplines in the Yoga system of Patanjali. It is essential for success in Yoga. In all religions it is greatly stressed. It is one of the five basic vows, vratas, in Jainism, where it is obligatory for all its votaries, monastic as well as lay. The Jain monks observe a vow of absolute chastity--mahavrata, and the householders observe it as an anuvrata, relative vow. In Buddhism also, brahmacharya is prescribed as one of the five values, panchasheel. In Hinduism, it is equally extolled. A Hindu is supposed to observe brahmacharya in three of the four ashramas or periods of life: brahmacharya or student life, vanaprastha or the period of retirement, and finally sannyasa or monastic period. Sex is allowed only during the householder-period and that too only for progeny. Christianity is also no exception. St. Paul advises the Christians: Jesus Christ has advocated a very high standard of sexual purity: Some saints too seem to endorse the above statement of Jesus. As in the example of the great Bilvamangala Thakura who lived for seven hundred years in Vrindavana, becoming a great devotee of Krishna. Yet in the beginning he was an impersonalist. He was a South Indian brahmana, a very rich man and such a sensuous person. He was so much devoted to a prostitute that while he was performing his father’s death ceremony. He was asking the priest, “Please, haste. Please make haste. I have to go. I have to go.” This means that he wanted to go to that prostitute’s house. But when he left his home, oh, it was such torrential rain. But being full of passion he never cared for the rain. He went to the riverside. Oh, there was no boat and the river was so turbulent. The waves were very furious. And he thought, “How can I go to the other side?” Anyway, despite the great difficulties he swam across the river. Meanwhile the prostitute was thinking, “Oh, it is raining tonight, Bilvamangala will not come.” So she bolted the door and went to sleep. Then when he came to the house he saw, “Oh, the door is locked,” and it was still raining. “So how can I go home now?” he thought. So he crossed over the wall by catching one snake. Just see how intensely he was attached to sense gratification. So he went to the prostitute, and she was astonished: “Well, Bilvamangala how did you dare to come here in weather like this?” So, he described his great endeavour to get to her place, “Yes. I did this, I did this, I did this, I did this.” Oh, the prostitute was astonished. Her name was Cintamani. So the prostitute said, “My dear Bilvamangala, you have got such intense love for me, oh, had it been for Krishna, how your life would have been, sublime.” Oh, that struck him: “Yes.” He at once left and went away: “Yes, you are right.” Then when he was going to Vrindavana. He saw another beautiful woman because this was his habitual practise. So he followed that woman. That woman belonged to a respectable family. So the woman said to her husband, “Oh, this man is following me. Please ask, ‘What is the idea?’ ” So the husband asked, “My dear sir, from your appearances I understand you to be a very nice gentleman, and you belong to a very aristocratic family. What do you want? Why you are following my wife?” Bilvamangala said, “Yes, I am following your wife because I want to embrace her.” “Oh, you want to embrace? Come on. Embrace. Come on. You are welcome. Come on.” He ordered his wife, “Oh, here is a guest. He wants to embrace you and kiss you. So please decorate yourself nicely so that he may enjoy.” So the wife followed the instruction of the husband because the wife’s duty is to follow the husband’s instructions. Then when in the woman’s room Bilvamangala said, “My dear mother, will you kindly give me your hairpins?” “Yes. Why?” she said. “I have got some business.” Then he took the hairpin and at once pierced his eyes: “Oh, this eye, and this eye, is my enemy.” And he became blind. “That’s all right. Now no more I shall be disturbed.” So in that blindness he was practising, austerity in Vrindavana. However Srila Prabhupada has a more pragmatic approach for today’s world. India, of course, is steeped in the tradition of brahmacharya. Indians worship Shiva, the great Lord, Mahadeva, who is among the greatest of the conquerors lust. He burnt Cupid, the god of lust, by the fire from his third eye. Then we have the illustrious grandsire Bhishma, who took the vow of life-long celibacy and kept it under heavy odds. Jain history is also replete with illuminating and amazing stories of the practice of chastity even in marriage. It is said in the Patanjali's Yoga Sutras (II, 38) that one who gets established in brahmacharya by the unbroken practice of continence in thought, word and deed for twelve years gains tremendous energy and a gigantic will power. He gains a unique power of convincing others by whatever he says. Continence gives a tremendous control over mankind. According to Srila Prabhupada, brahmacharya is the great tapas or austerity. Probably the most famous advocate of brahmacharya in recent times is Mahatma Gandhi. The opinion of Gandhiji carries great weight because he was a householder and yet took the vow of brahmacharya and fulfilled it successfully. Srila Prabhupada attributes his success in driving the British from India due to him being a resolute brahmacharya. Gandhi has devoted two chapters to brahmacharya in his autobiography, My Experiments with Truth. Gandhiji related all moral values to truth. For him, brahmacharya was essential for the right practice of truth and ahimsa. Besides, he realized its importance for social life, and has also described his experiments with the control of other senses, especially the sense of taste, and diet and fasting as aids to the practice of brahmacharya. Today we have reached a stage where sex is beginning to be looked upon merely as a means of recreation, and its biological, moral, ethical and spiritual aspects are being disregarded. One can become a parent today without sex and there can be sex without parenthood. The institution of marriage and its sanctity and inviolability is no more there. It has been replaced by new sets of norms, laws and concepts governing sexual relationships. Authoritarian restraint of sexual behaviour by the orthodox religious societies and puritanical Victorian morals has been replaced by unhindered sexualization of modern culture. Literature, painting, sculpture and music have been sexualised. Stage, movies and television have been worse affected. So far, almost the only important achievement of this relatively new instrument of communication (TV) has consisted in bringing into millions of our homes the erotically charged, alcoholic atmosphere of night clubs, ugly commercials and endless murder and sex plays. Popular press and advertising have not escaped. Even sciences, especially historical, psychological, biological and social, have been adversely affected. There is a greatly increased sex--mindedness in today's psychology, sociology and anthropology. Thus, what is a natural instinct has been converted into the basest form of cultural perversion. But spiritual seekers still continue to consider brahmacharya as the most important means of attaining the spiritual goal. The ultimate goal of all spiritual endeavour is to rise above body-consciousness and attain Krishna-consciousness, and since lust is the grossest manifestation of body-consciousness, it is diametrically opposed to the spiritual goal. To realize one's true spiritual nature, therefore, one must rise above the idea that one is a body and is male or female. The very first step to this is to eschew lust in every form. The goal of Patanjali's system of yoga is restraint of the thought waves arising on the surface of the mind. Now, these thought waves can arise due to external stimuli received through senses, or from subconscious impressions in the form of memory, imaginations or desires. These subconscious impressions are deep, as has been demonstrated by Freud. The roots of sex are indeed very deep. Unless they are rooted out, one cannot attain perfect concentration and samadhi. Patanjali's yoga sutras describe five kleshas--the basic causes of suffering--one of which is raga or attachment to objects, activities and individuals, which give us pleasure. Lust is one such raga, since it gives the maximum momentary pleasure. The ultimate cause of all suffering, however, is avidya or ignorance, and conquest of lust helps a great deal in attenuating avidya. Avidya being the root cause, lust can die only when this avidya is completely destroyed. According to the Tantras, brahmacharya is important for the awakening of Kundalini, the psychic shakti which lies dormant at the lowermost centre called the muladhara. When awakened, it ascends and passes through five more chakras to finally unite with the supreme spirit, Brahman, in the highest centre, sahasrara. Normally an average individual's mind dwells in the three lower chakras, the muladhara, swadhishthana and manipura, which correspond to the functions of eating, sleeping and procreation. The kundalini shakti also remains confined to these centres only. This concept very appropriately correlates with Freud's concept of the three levels of libido: oral, anal and genital. It is believed that human beings derive maximum pleasure in sex. However, a child whose sex-organs and sexuality are not yet developed does not derive joy from sex. Instead, it gets joy in eating--the mouth is the centre of his pleasure. Now, just as sex is the next stage and the genital organ the next centre in the evolution of the pleasure principle in an individual, there could be further levels as centres of pleasure. The Tantras state that this is indeed the case. Anahata, Vishuddha, Ajna and Sahasrara are such higher centres. It is a mistake to think that sexual enjoyment is the maximum possible enjoyment one can have. All saints and sages vouch from their personal experience that an individual experiences greater and greater pleasure as his higher chakras bloom and open up, or become active. It is said that when the kundalini reaches the highest chakra and the sahasrara opens, the aspirant merges in samadhi and gets bliss equivalent to the pleasure of sexual union in every pore of the body! Lord Krishna says in Bhagavada-gita: All worldly and even heavenly joys then pale into insignificance. It is said that the pleasure of sex-enjoyment and the superhuman enjoyments obtained in heavens are not even a sixteenth part of that obtained by giving up all desires. Etymologically the word brahmacharya means: Vyasa, the commentator of the Yoga Sutras, however, defines brahmacharya as the control of the organ of generation and giving up of all forms of lust, which means not only abstaining from gross sexual indulgence but also thinking, willing, seeing, talking, observing and indulging in sexual entertainment mentally or through other senses. Srila Prabhupada explains the vital importance of brahmacharya thus: Sex plays such a dominant role in the life of most of the people that it is worth considering another of its dimensions, viz., social. Ever since the postulation of the theory of libido by Sigmund Freud and the consequent sexualization of the western culture, the social dimensions of sex and brahmacharya have gained much greater importance. We may not agree with the postulate of Sigmund Freud that sex is the most important driving force in man and that the fullest sexual development, both physical and psychological, is the goal to be achieved for a complex-free psyche. But we must admit that Freud has provided us with deep insights into the workings of the subconscious mind. The roots of lust are indeed deep. Even Lord Krishna has hinted at it in answer to a pertinent question by Arjuna. He not only describes the power of lust but in a significant in-depth analysis, points out three seats of lust: Thus according to Lord Krishna, desire, especially lust, is extremely powerful and can overpower even a wise man. Secondly, it has three seats, i.e., it acts and rests at three levels. That a person enjoys the objects through the senses is understandable. But lust also rests in the mind. That means, an individual 'enjoys' through imagination, memory, and mental cogitation also. The third seat of lust--intellect--is the most significant and deep. Intellect is that function of the mind, which arrives at firm conclusions and decisions, which later take the form of beliefs and convictions, which prompt our thoughts and actions. So what is the meaning of having intellect as the seat of lust? When one, through experience, reason or by false belief, is convinced that indulging in sex is good, that it conduces to health, peace and happiness, that it is the only true goal of life and that there is nothing wrong in fulfilling one's lustful desire by whichever means, then lust is firmly established in its deepest, surest seat in the intellect. It is easy to control the senses; one might with some effort abstain from sensual imagination, memories and thoughts pertaining to lust, but it is extremely difficult to conquer lust if it has taken firm root in the intellect in the form of a firm conviction. Hence Lord Krishna, while advising Arjuna 'to kill this sinful thing which destroys the realization of knowledge, by first controlling senses at the very outset,' also advises him as follows: In the Katha Upanishad we hear of the concept of shreyas and preyas. Needless to say, shreyas - The ultimate good, should be the goal of the spiritual aspirant (brahmacharya). Whereas the preyas – the immediate enjoyment, is rejected by the higher self. Of the five yamas or moral values, brahmacharya alone has a physiological dimension, which has been studied by the Indian system of medicine, Ayurveda. According to Ayurveda, there are seven dhatus or elements in the human body. The food that we eat is digested and converted into its essence or rasa, which is absorbed into the system. Rasa is transformed into blood, blood into flesh, flesh into fat, fat into bone, bone into marrow and marrow into shukra or seed or semen. According to this theory semen is the seventh dhatu and naturally the most important and refined. It is the very essence, as it were, of all the preceding six dhatus. Hence its loss is considered a great loss. If preserved, shukra gets absorbed into the system and is converted into ojas. Ojas is something subtler than the dhatus. It has a physical aspect as well as a subtler mental aspect. It nourishes not only the physical body but also the brain and the nervous system. It imparts physical lustre and charm to the body and sharpens the intellect, heightens the memory and conduces to general serenity and blissfulness. According to Ayurveda, therefore, excessive loss of shukra through sex would lead to weakening of the proceeding six dhatus by draining them out, and would also reduce ojas. It is, therefore, expressly advised that shukra must be discharged only for procreation and not otherwise. Is there any counterpart of this theory in modern physiology? Probably not. It is difficult to confirm this theory of Ayurveda on the basis of the knowledge of allopathic physiology. Both the systems--modern Allopathic medicine and Ayurveda--have their own theories and concepts, entirely different from each other and it is not a sound policy to try to confirm one concept with the help of the other. According to modern physiology the human body is governed by two sets of nerves; one, which is under the voluntary control of the individual, and the other, which works involuntarily and is not under the control of the individual. The latter, the autonomic nervous system, has two components: the sympathetic and the parasympathetic. These two are highly excited during sexual intercourse. Whenever we are emotionally disturbed--be it in anger, fear, or sexual excitement--the autonomic nervous system is activated. The heart starts beating faster; the respiration becomes fast and irregular; there is perspiration, increase or decrease in salivation, etc. Such repeated stimulation of the autonomic nervous system and the consequent unnatural excitation of the cardio-respiratory system may ultimately produce permanent damage to these systems. It has been shown that the seminal fluid contains secretions from a gland called prostate situated at the base of the urinary bladder. This prostatic secretion contains phosphates, which it has been proved, are useful for cerebral functions. Glycerophosphates are often used as brain tonics. Besides, prostate also produces chemicals called prostaglandins, which have a wide range of anti-inflammatory protective effects on various organs of the body. Synthetic prostaglandins are nowadays extensively used as anti-inflammatory, anti-arthritic drugs. It seems that the secretion of natural prostaglandins was Mother Nature's method of keeping the body protected against a large number of inflammatory reactions and providing natural resistance. To what extent the loss of semen affects the natural prostaglandin-regulatory system and leads to loss of natural phosphates, and whether such a loss is significant for the physical and mental health of an individual, is difficult to say. But it is quite understandable that if the above facts are true, over-indulgence in sex and excessive loss of semen might adversely affect the physical and mental health of the individual. Ojas, in terms of modern physiology can well mean greater natural resistance and an ability to bear greater stress and strain, both physical and mental. There are also many other ways in which these chemicals can be lost or gained. Even according to Ayurveda, ojas can be lost in many ways other than sex. It also remains to be determined what is the counterpart of shukra or semen in women. It is therefore irrational to lay too great a stress on the physiological aspect of brahmacharya. However, one fact cannot be denied. Sexual indulgence leads to excitement of the cardiovascular, respiratory and nervous systems. No sadhaka aspiring to have deep, prolonged meditation can risk such excitement. One may, by practice, be able to sit unmoved in one posture for a long time as a physical feat, but without Brahmacharya it is impossible to have deep and prolonged one-pointed meditation. Since lust has various seats--senses, mind and intellect--the practice of brahmacharya can also be done variously. Lord Krishna advises Arjuna to first of all control the senses: It is always a safe policy to avoid people, places, activities and situations, which might stimulate lustful thoughts. In the spiritual warfare, flight is the best way of winning over this deadly enemy, lust. Let us never be too self-confident. Some restrictions about food will also help in reducing the pull of the turbulent senses. Srila Prabhupada comments in this regard: Mahatma Gandhi as mentioned previously, did a number of experiments with diet and was of the opinion that occasional fasting helped in subduing lust. The control of palate is often underestimated and not practised as rigorously as it should be. It is impossible to subdue lust without controlling the palate. Then there are certain Hatha-yogic practices, which, though effective, have the disadvantage of making one all the more body-conscious. They may, however, prove useful for some temperaments. The ultimate solution, however, to the problem of lust is to develop Atmabuddhi--to consider ourselves and others as sexless, pure, blissful Atman rather than male or female bodies. How often did Srila Prabhupada say that we are not these bodies? Unfortunately it is not so easy and requires persistent, prolonged effort. These are some of the general means and methods for the practice of brahmacharya. Modifications and alterations must be made according to the individual and his station in life. It is also heartening to see that many married couples, inspired by Srila Prabhupada’s preaching, are trying to practise brahmacharya in married life and endeavouring to reinstate the institution of marriage to its sanctified height once more. According to Pitrim Sorokin (famous for his work on sociology), there is an odd, unidentified revolution-taking place in modern times. This involves only individuals and has no army, or civil war. And yet this silent revolution, which he calls 'Sex Revolution', is being carried on by billions of people all over the world leading to sexual anarchy. This is as important as any other revolution because of its profound effects upon the individual and society. Sorokin, in his book, Sane Sex Order, discusses the harmful effects of sex anarchy on the physical and mental health and creativity of individuals, and upon society in general. One of its most dreaded effects is the breakdown of the family, which is the unit of a sane and stable society. In USA and European countries, family life is rapidly deteriorating. In Britain, every year 150,000 children under 16 are added to the numbers who experience the divorce of their parents. Never-married mothers quadrupled to 360,000 over the period 1971-89. In 1980, 12 percent births took place outside marriage; in 1990, 28 percent did so. One-parent families now comprise 19 percent of the total, and more than 30 percent of births now take place outside marriage. In USA, the epidemic of teenage pregnancy, 'Children having children', has become a public health crisis, and divorce rate has doubled in ten years. Two-fifth of children live in single-parent homes for at least some part of their youth. It is not that children from single- parent families cannot prosper, but they do worse on average than those from traditional families in every dimension--physically, emotionally, behaviourally, educationally, economically and in terms of smoking and drinking. They die earlier, do less well at school, are less well nourished, suffer more unemployment, and are more prone to deviance, crime and are more susceptible to psychiatric illness. The community in one sense is an extended family. Loss of community life finds expression in crime, vandalism and violence. Establishment of a sane sex order and a stable marriage system are, therefore, the most important sociological needs of the times. Anthropologically, there are many kinds of marriages. In Vedic culture eight kinds of marriages have been described but monogamy with mutual consent is the accepted pattern. But polygamy was allowed until about eighty years ago in India: Then there are still some tribes where polyandry is in vogue. There are also many kinds of family, apart from the traditional joint families and nuclear families with two stably married individuals living at home. While these traditional modes of marriage and family patterns may not be the ideal ones for industrial and post industrial societies, the need for human care and support by carers close to us, ideally our parents, until we are at least 20 and thereafter support of a spouse 'in sickness and in health' ...'till death do us part,' is one of the most notable features of the modern day human being in todays society. All this cannot be fulfilled in the modern day culture dominated by sexual anarchy and illicit sex relationships. Sorokin, therefore, suggests a scheme of ennoblement of culture and social life as a means to establish a sane sex order. It basically consists in liberation of our culture and institutions from the curse of sexuality. The main change in such ennoblement must involve desexualization of our fine arts, the media, including radio and TV, recreations and sports, our sciences and philosophy, social and humanistic disciplines, ethics and law; in short, our total way of life. Idealistic ennoblement of love, marriage and family are also a part of this great transformation. This, then, in sum is the sociological dimension of Brahmacharya, which must not be overlooked even while practicing Brahmacharya in thought, word and deed. Appendix Dhatus. Dr. Satish Kulkarni. The three basic constituents of the body (three Doshas i.e. vaat-pitta-kafa) are created by five supreme powers i.e. Earth (pruthvi), Water (aap), Divine Fire (tej), Air (vayu) and Universal Space (aakash). Amongst these powers, Divine Fire (tej) is the precursor of pitta and body fire (agni) is the successor of pitta. Agni plays a vital role in the creation and maintenance of body tissues (dhatus). The human body is made up of seven basic tissues or vital substances called dhatus. The meaning of the sanskrit word dhatu is ‘that which binds together’. Dhatu is the element, which constructs our body. Dhatu is the base of growth and survival. Dhatus take different forms in our body to maintain life. Different organs (sharir avayavas) and different body systems (strotasas) are made out of dhatus. Our nourishment and development is fully dependent on dhatus. Ayurveda believes that there are seven dhatus in all. They are: life sap (rasa), blood (rakta), muscles (mansa), fatty tissue (med), bones (asthi), bone marrow and nervous tissue (majja) and semen and reproductive system (shukra). Each dhatu has its own agni i.e. dhatu-agni. Our food intake is converted into life sap by agni of rasa dhatu and rasa dhatu is produced. Likewise, agni of rakta dhatu prepares rakta out of rasa and so on. Every dhatu is a precursor of the next dhatu. Rasa is transformed into rakta, rakta prepares mansa, mansa is further transformed into meda, meda is used to make asthi, asthi forms majja and majja produces the ultimate dhatu i.e. shukra. Ayurveda researchers must have observed that food is the starting point of life. Food enters the body from the inlet— the mouth and the end products come out of body through the outlet— the genitalia and anus. The second important observation must have been that any living creature (including human beings) survives and grows with food and dies without it. They must have seen that starvation retards growth of the body and destroys the body in the end. Thus, this theory of dhatus must have arrived from these observations. Dhatus protect our body from external encounters. They are responsible for our immune mechanism. If there is wasting (kshaya) of dhatus then the body construction collapses and ultimately life ends. Ayurveda recognises shukra as the most important dhatu. It states that one needs a hundred drops of blood (rakta) to produce one drop of semen (shukra). Shukra is the essence of all the body tissues and is that creation of Mother Nature, which has the capacity to produce new life. In any case, it should not be wasted without substantial reason (i.e. reproduction). Disorder in doshas (vaat-pitta-kafa) affects dhatus. These affected or defective dhatus hamper the quality of life. Proper diet (ahar) and proper life style (vihar) help in maintaining the balance of Doshas and in producing healthy dhatus. To summarize, dhatus account for the ayurvedic explanation of the anatomy and physiology of the human body. Our body processes consumed food and transforms it into life sap, which in turn creates a chain of further body tissues i.e. dhatus. Their gain gives quality to our life and their loss destroys life. Quotes "Ayurveda itself teaches a physiology of the production of sperm, based on the central idea that there are seven essential constituents of the body (the seven dhatus: chyle, blood, flesh, fat, bone, marrow and semen) produced through a cycle of successive internal cookings and transformations. The ultimate distilling, the most concentrated and hence the most precious, is semen". "The present study indicates that the attitudes toward semen loss constitute an organized belief system... [more common in] low-education and low-income groups... Semen is considered a precious material formed by the distillation of blood. Forty meals gives rise to one drop of blood. Forty drops of blood give rise to one drop of bone marrow. Forty drops of bone marrow give rise to one drop of the elixir of life, semen. One ejaculation of semen will lead to wastage of a wealth of energy. This belief can be traced back to the holy scriptures”. "Celibacy improves the condition of your semen. However much semen you are able to retain, you will receive in that proportion greater wisdom, improves action, higher spirituality and increased knowledge. Moreover, you will acquire the power to get whatever you want. (Yogacharya Bhagwandev 1992: 15)" [Abstract] "A large segment of the general public from all socioeconomic classes believe that semen loss is harmful. Seminal fluid is considered an elixir of life in the physical and mystical sense. Its preservation guarantees health, longevity, and supernatural powers" (Malhotra and Wig, 1975: 519).

Sridas prabhu; Thank you to giving me the opportunity to debunk the various specious arguments presented by some of the followers of H.H. BR Sridhar Maharaj. But you yourself have done the same thing and the website you linked to also passes the same judgement on Srila Prabhupada statements in 1974. In fact you yourself even had the audacity to say that there was something contradictory about these statements by Srila Prabhupada. "It appears somewhat contradictary if this is truly the statement of Srila Prabhupada." If this is not an example of passing judgment and criticising. I don't know what is. Just because a certain number of Shrila Prabhupada's disciples went to HH Sridhar Maharaj's mutt does not prove that they were authorised to do so by Srila Prabhupada. For example the same disciples told us in 1978 that Srila Prabhupada had authorised only eleven selected chosen disciples to be initiating gurus within ISKCON. However by 1986 they had then declared that this was all lies and that actually Srila Prabhupada wanted more than just eleventh of these choosen disciples to be initiating gurus. So as I pointed out in my previous post unless it is in writing or recorded on tape by Srila Prabhupada it is not really direct evidence and can only be considered as supporting evidence to any point which is being made. No, where does Srila Prabhupada state that the giver of sannyasa (Sannyasa guru) has to be an "uttama bhakta"? This is your invention and as such it is reprehensible. siddha-purusa--liberated persons [CC ML TEXT 162-163] This method is applicable both in the stage of sadhana [spiritual practices executed while in the stage of bondage] and in the stage of sadhya [God realization], when one is a siddha-purusa, or a spiritually perfect soul."[NOI 8] I find that your above statement is highly doubtful. If your statement was true then why would Srila Prabhupada, our ever well-wisher, advise his beloved disciples to avoid these persons (his godbrothers), not to mix with with them etc. "We shall be very careful about them and not mix with them." [sPL Rupanauga 28.4.74] You claim that Sridhar Maharaj was very close to Srila Prabhupada family - not just close - but "very close to"! Approximately how many times did HH Sridhara Maharaj actually meet the members of Srila Prabhupada's family and was he meeting them on a daily basis or are you trying to create another illusion adding to the web of illusion which you have been spinning us so far? How do you know this? Who are you to judge? He may not have been there in the flesh and blood but that does not mean to say that he was not present and that his presence was not perceived by the speaker. Just because I challenge your interpretation of what Srila Bhaktisiddanta Sarasvati has said does not mean that I do not accept the authority of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati and suggesting such merely proves my point that you take every opportunity to mislead the reader. Because I challenge your erroneous conclusions you conclude that I am an offender and that I am committing spiritual suicide this is the sum and substance of your presentation. Your mentality is very similar to that of certain Christian cults who insist that if one does not accept Jesus Christ as the Lord and Saviour then one is doomed to hell and in hell it is very, very hot, full of suffering and misery. In other words they cannot discuss sidhanta in a logical and rational basis and instead attempt to instill fear for any alleged offences. The main offence - being that of disagreeing with what they have declared to be the truth. It is evident that you have not made any more advancement than the members of these Christian cults because you have the same mundane mentality. The statements which I have posted about HH Sridhar Maharaj and his godbrothers are not my statements they are Srila Prabhupada statements and if you think he is a just another common devotee then your problem is much worse than I had initially thought.

Sridas prabhu; Having looked at the website which you have linked to. I have selected chapter four of “Our Affectionate Guardians” as being the most relevant to the points under discussion. Chapter four begins with an attempt to present some evidence as proof that Srila Prabhupada wanted his disciples to approach “Sridhara Maharaja if they had questions about philosophical matters.” The authors of this document then proceed to give us testimonies from several of Shrila Prabhupada disciples, to this effect. However there is no written or taped evidence from Srila Prabhupada himself which is essential if the author’s are trying to establish their point. The testimonies from Srila Prabhupada’s disciples is acceptable as supporting evidence but without direct statements from His Divine Grace the position of the author’s can be considered to be very weak. This fact is practically admitted by the authors themselves when they state that “[some of whom later changed their minds regarding the validity of their previous statements].” This quote is in regard to the validity of the statements which they are presenting as evidence, as such is most revealing as to the nature of their evidence. Srila Prabhupada himself said in a letter to Omkara –Vrindaban 2 September, 1975 There is nothing in writing from Srila Prabhupada to confirm the validity of the testimonies of his disciples, which as the author's have admitted, are constantly changing. Depending on whom they are speaking to at the time etc. The authors then proceed to inform us that sometimes “Srila Prabhupada himself spoke highly of Srila Sridhara Maharaja”. They then give 5 quotes to substantiate this conclusion. Of these five statements only three can be verified by looking on the vedabase. It would be nice if the author’s could produce the other two statements in full and if they are bona-fide - present them to the Bhaktivedanta Archives for inclusion in the next version of the Vedabase. However no one is disputing the fact that sometimes Srila Prabhupada did speak highly of Sridhar Maharaj. This however does not prove that he instructed his disciples to go to Sridhar Maharaj after his departure, or at any other time for that matter - post 1974. The author’s then presume that which is yet to be proven “Despite Srila Prabhupada's final and conclusive statements regarding Srila Sridhara Maharaja” but where are these final and conclusive statements other than those statements from 1974 in his letter to Rupanuga? So what the authors of “Our Affectionate Guardians” have done here is they have tried to establish a scenario of contradictions. They have tried to establish in the reader's mind that Srila Prabhupada gave some instructions to his disciples to take guidance from Sridhar Maharaj and that this contradicts Srila Prabhupada statements made in 1974 and thus we must look at those statements made in 1974 in some other light, other than in the direct perception. I find this highly misleading and will present evidence from Srila Prabhupada’s disciples which support those statements to Rupanuga in 1974 and give some background information as to why Srila Prabhupada made those statements. (As follows) Now some people may wonder what is the background to the statements by Shrila Prabhupada to Rupanuga. This is also something the authors have tried to establish in their paper “Our Affectionate Guardians.” I shall now present the rather passionate testimony of Narah Narayan Das which will help the reader to understand just what was going on in 1972-1974. Dhananjaya prabhu confirms the above incident in a more concise and less passionate manner as follows: In conclusion without any direct evidence from Srila Prabhupada that he wanted his disciples to take instructions from Sridhar Maharaj and with the supporting testimonies of Nara Narayan and Dananjaya prabhus we have to conclude that Srila Prabhupada’s statements to Rupanuga in 1974 should be taken at face value.

(27) He is not qualified to become acarya. "Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya. So it is better not to mix with my Godbrothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students and disciples they may sometimes pollute them." (Letter to Rupunuga, 28/4/74) You can't believe it. Wake up babe! It is there, so either you have got it wrong or ? I would rather not mention the alternative option. Please prove these statement that you have in quotation marks by supplying verifiable references. Please prove this also. Please prove this also. Well we can agree on this point. Of course I don't expect you to perceive that you are also adding to the situation by your unverified statements. Once again your statements are just not in line with those of Srila Prabhupada. Aside from the qualification, Srila Prabhupada also taught that specific authorisation from the predecessor acarya was also essential before anyone could act as a diksa guru: "On the whole, you may know that he is not a liberated person, and therefore, he cannot initiate any person to Krsna Consciousness. It requires special spiritual benediction from higher authorities." (SP Letter to Janardana, 26/4/68) "One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master. This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54, purport) Indian man: When did you become spiritual the leader of Krsna Consciousness? Srila Prabhupada: What is that? Brahmananda: He is asking when did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna Consciousness? Srila Prabhupada: When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. This is the guru parampara. Indian man: Did it... Srila Prabhupada: Try to understand. Don't go very speedily. A guru can become guru when he is ordered by his guru. That's all. Otherwise nobody can become guru. (SP Bg. Lecture, 28/10/75) Thus, according to Srila Prabhupada, one can only become a diksa guru when both the qualification and authorisation are in place. Even if what you have written here is true, it proves nothing. For example he could have been looking at Srila Prabhupada when he said "Now I'm satisfied at least one person can continue our (disciplic) line." No, but I hope you are not trying to be offensive! Yes, well I think you are chewing the chewed here. Regarding Srila Prabhupada's statement about Sridhara Maharaja being his 'siksa guru' let us look at the complete statement. It comes from a letter in 1969 to a disciple Hrisikesa, who had ALREADY REJECTED Srila Prabhupada, and who wished to join the Gaudiya Matha. However he had selected to join Bon Maharaja who Srila Prabhupada describes in the same letter as being a 'black snake'. Therefore in order to save someone who had already left ISKCON, from going to a black snake, Srila Prabhupada refers him to Sridhara Maharaja. Why? Because as Srila Prabhupada states later: " But in my opinion he is the best of the lot. He is my old friend, at least he executes the regulative principles of devotional service." (Letter to Rupunuga, 28/4/74) Because Sridhara Maharaja was the best of the 'lot', the same 'lot' which Srila Prabhupada also condemned as not being qualified to be acharya, "Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya. So it is better not to mix with my Godbrothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students and disciples they may sometimes pollute them." (Letter to Rupunuga, 28/4/74) and because he AT LEAST followed the regulative principles, Sridhara Maharaja was recommended as an alternative to a black snake. Therefore this was NOT just an act of diplomacy. It was an act of mercy, to save someone from a black snake, and therefore the person was advised to take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja, and in THIS CONNECTION Sridhara Maharaja is praised, in order to induce his disciple to leave Bon Maharaja. However please note the following facts which are relevant: EVEN if we accept for the sake of argument, that Sridhara Maharaja WAS Srila Prabhupada's Siksa guru, Srila Prabhupada never tells US to accept Sridhara Maharaja as OUR Siksa guru or to consult him. On the contrary, as I have quoted before, he instructs US to actually AVOID Sridhara Maharaja. Further the only time anyone was advised to go to Sridhara Maharaja, was only to STOP that person from going to a 'black snake'. Thus there are NO instructions from Srila Prabhupada instructing us to take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja (except to stop one person from taking shelter from a 'black snake'), but there ARE instructions from Srila Prabhupada telling us to NOT take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja. Therefore we can conclude: If you wish to take shelter of a black snake, and have rejected the shelter of Srila Prabhupada, THEN Sridhara maharaja is a better alternative. In ALL OTHER CASES - Avoid the association of Sridhara Maharaja. This is what Srila Prabhupada actually advises. Why not? If you can demonstrate that what is posted is false, then I can see your point. However you have not been able to demonstrate such, so far. I think that you have displayed the same arrogance in your post. So how can I learn from you?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p>Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however we don't need to agree with it. Kulapavana prabhu's above statement is not upheld by the facts.</o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p><o:p></o:p><o:p> In case Kulapavana prabhu thinks that HH Jayapataka is a liar, his testimony is confirmed by Mahamaya dd. Or perhaps they are both under the influence of the material energy. However Srila Prabhupada has the following statements to add to the above. So in conclusion Kulapavana prabhu's above statement is bogus as it is coming from a poor fund of knowledge. </o:p>

Regarding Srila Prabhupada's statement about Sridhara Maharaja being his 'siksa guru' let us look at the complete statement. Regarding Srila Prabhupada's statement about Sridhara Maharaja being his 'siksa guru' let us look at the complete statement. It comes from a letter in 1969 to a disciple Hrisikesa, who had ALREADY REJECTED Srila Prabhupada, and who wished to join the Gaudiya Matha. However he had selected to join Bon Maharaja who Srila Prabhupada describes in the same letter as being a 'black snake'. Therefore in order to save someone who had already left ISKCON, from going to a black snake, Srila Prabhupada refers him to Sridhara Maharaja. Why? Because as Srila Prabhupada states later: " But in my opinion he is the best of the lot. He is my old friend, at least he executes the regulative principles of devotional service." (Letter to Rupunuga, 28/4/74) Because Sridhara Maharaja was the best of the 'lot', the same 'lot' which Srila Prabhupada also condemned as not being qualified to be acharya, "Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya . So it is better not to mix with my Godbrothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students and disciples they may sometimes pollute them." (Letter to Rupunuga, 28/4/74) and because he AT LEAST followed the regulative principles, Sridhara Maharaja was recommended as an alternative to a black snake. Therefore this was NOT just an act of diplomacy. It was an act of mercy, to save someone from a black snake, and therefore the person was advised to take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja, and in THIS CONNECTION Sridhara Maharaja is praised, in order to induce his disciple to leave Bon Maharaja. However please note the following facts which are relevant: EVEN if we accept for the sake of argument, that Sridhara Maharaja WAS Srila Prabhupada's Siksa guru, Srila Prabhupada never tells US to accept Sridhara Maharaja as OUR Siksa guru or to consult him. On the contrary, as I have quoted before, he instructs US to actually AVOID Sridhara Maharaja. Further the only time anyone was advised to go to Sridhara Maharaja, was only to STOP that person from going to a 'black snake'. Thus there are NO instructions from Srila Prabhupada instructing us to take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja (except to stop one person from taking shelter from a 'black snake'), but there ARE instructions from Srila Prabhupada telling us to NOT take shelter of Sridhara Maharaja. Therefore we can conclude: If you wish to take shelter of a black snake, and have rejected the shelter of Srila Prabhupada, THEN Sridhara maharaja is a better alternative. In ALL OTHER CASES - Avoid the association of Sridhara Maharaja. This is what Srila Prabhupada actually advises.

One of the symptoms of their sickness is the havoc they have been creating in society. This is distressing to those who have some affection for Srila Prabhupada and his mission.

Criticism and back-biting were also present in Greek culture. Plato is quoted as follows

This is a common misapprehension. The following quote from "The Four Principles Of Freedom" by Satyaraja Das, 1994 is quite definitive on this subject. I know this is true because I have lived in the Greece for many years and they still do the same today in rural districts with fruit juices. However Lord Jesus may have drunk alcoholic wine at some time or other due to certain mitigating circumstances, however he was never doing so as a sense enjoyer.

Well said!

Haridasa Sadhu The famous sannyasi, Haridasa Sadhu, was born in a small village in Maharastra. When he was about fifteen or sixteen years old, a sannyasi arrived from Tailangadesa (a south Indian district) now in the vicinity of Andhra and Telingana), and sat down under a tree near Haridasa's house. This sannyasi was a Vaisnava of the Kuver sect. Haridasa had great respect for this sannyasi and spent considerable time with him. Suddenly one day the sannyasi was found missing from his usual place under the tree, and simultaneously Haridasa also disappeared from the village. Haridasa accompanied the Tailangasvami to Puskara where he took initiation in sannyasadharma. After spending a few months at Puskara, Haridasa went to Kuruksetra with his guru, and devoted himself to the difficult practices of yogasiksa. He began by learning the art of the intake of food, asanavandhana, vaksamyama, and pranayama. Eventually, Haridasa became conversant with the entire difficult procedures related to yoga and successfully mastered the control of his respiratory system. By following `khecuri mudra', Haridasa mastered the art of locking the tongue in reverse which increased his capacity to retain air required for samadhi-asana. At last as a result of his complete mastery over Yogabhayasa, Haridasa acquired certain supernatural powers which earned him a great deal of respect and admiration not only from the general public, but from such personalities as the Raja, associates and ministers from the royal court, Mussalmen of the sunni-sect, and even Hindu-hating Christians. By 1815 AD. stories of the miraculous achievements of Haridasa Sadhu had spread far and wide. During his stay at Jambu, Raja Dhyana Simha, a minister of Maharaja Ranjitsimha, came to know, through his messenger, that a sannyasi named Haridasa had remained alive after a four months stay under mounds of earth in Amritsar. Dhyanasimha then sent a messenger to bring Haridasa back to Jambu. Despite the messengers insistence, Haridasa refused to go to Jambu. Then Dhyanasimha himself went to Amritsar and brought Haridasa and his associate disciples back to Jambu. In Jambu, Haridasa remained like an inanimate object under the earth for four months which Dhyanasimha observed with his own eyes. Prior to entering the prescribed spot Haridasa had his face clean shaven, yet when he emerged after four months, no growth of hair could be seen on his face. When many accounts of such episodes regarding Haridasa began to appear in various magazines, many people refused to accept them as facts. It has been said (Visvakos) that Lord Bentinck and Lord Auckland, both wrote letters to political agents at Rajaputana and Punjab asking them to verify the authenticity of the published reports. But Haridasa Sadhu refused to go to Calcutta as he thought that the Englishmen would, somehow or other, try to destroy a person like himself, who possessed extraordinary miraculous power. However, Mr. McNaughton, the political agent of Rajaputana, was determined to find out the truth. He brought Haridasa to Puskara where Haridasa performed asanavandhana and entered into a state of dhyana in the presence of an audience of many respectable persons. McNaughton then locked Haridasa in a safe and kept the safe in his own room. When the safe was unlocked and opened on the thirteenth day, Haridasa was found in an unconscious state and his body had become stiff like dried wood. However, within a short time, signs of life appeared in his body. Maharaval of Jalsamir was childless. Under the advice of his minister, Isvarlala, he brought Haridasa to his capital. On behalf of Maharavala, in order to nullify the effect of the antagonism existing on the planet, Haridasa, after performing the pre-samadhi rituals at his own residence, positioned himself in samadhi-asana within a very small pit about 3ft. long, 2 1/2 ft. deep, which was covered on top with earth. When the pit was cleared of earth after one month in the presence of Lieutenant Baylow and other high officials of the royal government, Haridasa was found still alive. Such extraordinary happenings were witnessed by many dignitaries at that time and these became widely known not only within India but in many countries overseas. Rumor mongers became active; Some expressed views that Sadhu Haridasa was actually a Frenchman and had migrated to India in Punjab after the battle of Waterloo. He became conversant with charlatanism while in Europe and had become an expert in the line; A section of the orthodox Hindu community claimed that Haridasa was the great saint Vedavyasa in his past incarnation and at the advent of Kaliyuga had kept himself in hiding (samahita) under the earth, and the Englishmen had discovered him while digging the earth; The Sikh community in Punjab regarded him with love and devotion, considering Haridasa Sadhu as an incarnation of Guru Nanak. To Englishmen such as Lt. Baylow and others, Haridasa explained in brief three rules to be practiced for yogabhyasa. These were; pranayama, khecurimudra, and rules for the intake of food. By observing the said rules during samadhi-asana, the activities within the human body cease to work and the body becomes inert like a corpse. Haridasa arrived at Lahore in 1835 Ad. on the occasion of the marriage ceremony of Navanihalsimha. Raja Dhyanasimha, the minister of Maharaja Ranjitasimha, who had previously met Haridasa, told the Maharaja about Haridasa's arrival at the palace and of his miraculous powers. Out of curiosity the Maharaja called for Haridasa, but upon seeing him the Maharaja suspected that all this talk about miraculous power was nothing but a fabricated story. To verify the truth, the Maharaja ensured that Haridasa, after his routine rituals, was placed inside a small wooden safe under lock and key. He had his men affix the royal seal on the lock and had the safe buried in the palace courtyard. As a further precaution against any loop holes, the Maharaja had his men sow barley seeds on the land covering the area under which the safe was buried. After forty days, when the seeds had grown into plants, the safe was excavated in the presence of Capt. Wade and other English officials. After the safe was unlocked, Haridasa's inert body was taken out and subjected to medical examination by Dr. McGregor, Dr. Murray and others. The doctors not only declared that Haridasa was dead, but remarked sarcastically that if Haridasa were able to regain his life then they would be prepared to believe that even the creation of a human being were possible. Disciples of Haridasa began to apply various methods for the revival of Haridasa's respiratory system and slowly signs of life appeared in the inert body, while everyone present stood watching the performance anxiously. After this incident no one had any furter doubts regarding Haridasa's miraculous power. In the course of discussing the subject of samadhi, Haridasa Sadhu spoke as follows: In the state of samadhi he enjoyed such blissful pleasure that he did not consider the exercise as a form of self-castigation. Actually the rituals to be performed prior to getting into the samadhi-asana were very painful and that is why Haridasa preferred to stay in the samahita state for a long period of time. The renowned Honigueburger, in his comments on yoga-nidra, said that animals like frogs are known to live hundreds of years in a state of deep sleep in the darkness of mountains. But as soon as they are brought into the presence of light and allowed to breath air, they become like regular live species. The same explanation may be offered in respect to yogis; once in a yoga-state, yogis also sleep in the same way as the frogs. Only on one more occasion Haridasa, at the request of Maharaja Ranjitsimha, remained buried underground for nearly ten months, that was his last demonstration. On various excuses, he declined the request of Englishmen like Mr. Osborne and others at Adinanagara. The Rani of Jhindana, by virtue of her exquisite beauty, intelligence and spirited character, was an embellishment of womankind; and as such it is difficult to guess the reason why she was so displeased with Haridasa. In fact, under her advice, the royal messengers insulted Haridasa very badly. So much so that even a yogi like Haridasa flew into such a rage that he told the messengers to convey to the wicked Maharaja that the latter would have no one to continue his line of descent. The very next day Haridasa disappeared with all his disciples from Lahore. As if by coincidence, a ksatriya girl also ran away from her home in Lahore about the same time. Haridasa's death also took place under extraordinary circumstances. One day he called his disciples and announced that his end was near. No one would be able to bring him back to life from the samadhi-asana he was going to perform. True enough he got into his usual samadhi-asana and passed away in a samahita posture. Around the time that Haridasa was born in India, ordained ministers of the Christian religion were busy propagating the viewpoint that the sastras and dharma followed by the Hindu's had no substance. By dint of Haridasa's yoga power he was able to establish that it was possible to acquire different kinds of power and authority by following the rules and practices described in the philosophy and sastra of the Hindu religion. (Visvakos Vol. 22, p. 491-493)