cbrahma

Shaktism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana Dharma.

Shaivism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana Dharma.

 

I thank Narayana with all my heart for not putting you in the positon of a Guru. Your inability to grasp basics is apalling. I cannot begin to imagine the harmful effects that would happen if someone like you was in the positon of a teacher.

 

Thankfully your nonsense is limited to this discussion forum where readers by now know how you seriously lack knowledge on Vaishnavism and your lack of ability to learn.

Your tit for tat logic is what is apalling. That is nonsense. Shaivism is not interchangeable with Vaisnavism. You commit again the fallacy of composition. Apples are fruits therefore fruits are apples....

I don't really care if you think I could be guru, since I'm not trying to be. I don't pontificate off the top of my head like you do.

Your Vaishnavism may include anything you like, and mine may exclude everything I don't like. That is the beauty of it. I do not mind being called sectarian, because I belong to the Gaudiya Vaishnava sect of Lord Caitanya. I use the mantras of that sect, I worship Krsna in their Temples, and paint my tilaka the way they do. I am sectarian.

I know you are sectarian. That is painfully obvious. But Vaisnavism doesn't belong to anybody. It isn't my Vaisnavism or your Vaisnavism. I don't know who your spiritual master is but what do you need one for if you think its a cafeteria of favorite philosophies and practices. Prabhupada and indeed the Vedas say that the path of bhakti is a science not to be defined by our personal whims and subjective biases. Religion without philosophy is sentimentality and philosophy without religion is mental speculation.

Theist is deceiving himself with false knowledge that he is above religion..

What in God's name is that supposed to mean? False knowledge? Newsflash...Vaisnavism is not a religion. It is the essence of religion - sanatana dharma.

I do not care if all of you Hare Christians put me on your ignore list. Don't surround yourself with yourself... it's a good advice. I do not mind hearing critical opinions when it comes to my views. I actually welcome it, because I can learn from such criticism.

 

Srila Prabhupada came to the West to transplant Vaishnavism into the rich soil of Western civilization. And he succeeded. We are all a proof of that. Some of the things he said and did can be criticized from various angles, but he achieved his goal, and I am sure he pleased Krsna to the highest degree. However, Vaishnavism is not static, or limited just to the form Srila Prabhupada chose to present in the West. Personally I am more attracted to traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism and have very little interest in or patience for attempts to blend GV with Abrahamic traditions in order to create some "universal religion".

Your whitewash language using the words 'blend' and 'Vaisnavism...limited to the form' contradicts the sectarian rigidity of saying that Abrahmic traditions cannot be included in a 'universal religion'.

This is not in keeping with the teaching of at least three Gaudiya Vaisnava acaryas. It doesn't matter what your sectarian presumptions happen to be, Vaisnavism is broad enough to include all religions that meet essential criteria.

Of course if a devotee feigns being an acarya and does not follow the principles of the acaryas it is a great distubance in devotional society. But this is mostly about those who become teachers of spirituality without accepting a bonafide guru in the line of disciplic succession themselves. To become a bonafide teacher one must become a bonafide student. The student must also not, "ignore the Vedic injunction acaryopasana--"One must worship the acarya"--and Krsna's statement in the Bhagavad-gita (4.2) evam parampara-praptam, "This supreme science of God is received through the disciplic succession." The perfect student becomes an acarya but our position at present is to become at least a neophyte and hopefully a madhyama student. As Srila Prabhupada once told, "first save yourself then you can save others." Our first concern is to become bonafide disciples of a bonafide guru. Everything depends on our own sincerity.

'Our' sincerity? The GBC's sincerity is what is at issue. Your evasions are becoming tedious. I really don't want to discuss this anymore.

Where in the sastras or the teachings any guru does it say,"One must always be alert to the corruption of false prestige especially where it concerns bogus gurus?" Obviously a sincere, aspiring sadhaka should search for a real guru and avoid bogus gurus. But in every spiritual process, all yogas, one must be alert to the corruption of false prestige especially where it concerns themselves. We are told to put our hand on heart each night before we take rest and think if we have made advancement that day by pleasing guru and Krsna. The Bhagavad Gita talks about "the introspective sage". Introspective means inward looking not outward looking towards the environment. It sounds like you are obsessed with blaming the environment for whatever reason. As conditioned souls we all have this tendency. But if what you write is an insight into your mentality, which it must be, then you are really missing the point of spiritual life. Who ever originally came to The Krsna Consciousness Movement to obsess about the faults of others, even if they are the GBC? The trade secret is that we become what we criticize for that is the natural law of the mental plane. Didn't your mother tell you, "if you can't say anything good about someone, don't say anything at all?" That's the general rule. Guess what? Your mother was right.

Isopanisad 12

The pseudo religionists have neither knowledge nor detachment from material affairs, for most of them want to live in the golden shackles of material bondage under the shadow of philanthropic activities disguised as religious principles. By a false display of religious sentiments, they present a show of devotional service while indulging in all sorts of immoral activities. In this way they pass as spiritual masters and devotees of God. Such violators of religious principles have no respect for the authoritative acaryas, the holy teachers in the strict disciplic succession. They ignore the Vedic injunction acaryopasana--"One must worship the acarya"--and Krsna's statement in the Bhagavad-gita (4.2) evam parampara-praptam, "This supreme science of God is received through the disciplic succession." Instead, to mislead the people in general they themselves become so-called acaryas, but they do not even follow the principles of the acaryas. These rogues are the most dangerous elements in human society. Because there is no religious government, they escape punishment by the law of the state. They cannot, however, escape the law of the Supreme, who has clearly declared in the Bhagavad-gita that envious demons in the garb of religious propagandists shall be thrown into the darkest regions of hell (Bg. 16.19-20). Sri Isopanisad confirms that these pseudo religionists are heading toward the most obnoxious place in the universe after the completion of their spiritual master business, which they conduct simply for sense gratification.

Thank-you very much.

 

I just don't get how Hare Christian is actually a cutdown. Essentially Kulapavana has admitted on this thread that his guru Srila Prabhupada characterized Jesus as a saktyavesa avatara which if I am not mistaken means that Jesus should be given the same basic respect that you would give to an incarnation of Krishna.

My understanding is that Kulapavana and Guruvani have determined through reading Prabhupada's mind that Prabhupada was just merely playing a trick on the idiot westerners and their irrational, sentimental attachment to Jesus when he said Jesus was a saktyavesa avatar and other nice things. Apparantly to Kulapavana and Guruvani, Prabhupada was lying about Jesus being an avatar with the ultimate goal of enticing idiot westerners to become completely assimilated into the Vaisnava tradition.

Its not a view I to because I have seen so many quotes by Prabhupada in regards to Jesus that Prabhupada would be a real disingenuous person and not worthy of being a guru in my opinion if he said some of the nice things he said about Jesus but didn't really mean it. My view however is not at all appreciated in Vaisnava circles because I am viewed as one of those idiot "Hare Christians" so basically I am just killing time on the internet.

Well considering the source, the label is meant as a pejorative. The very idea that Christianity could be included under the category of Vaisnavism is an affront to the traditional Hindu. They are very proud of their status. Like most bigots they want to 'keep it pure', very much in the same way that Hitler wanted to keep the Aryans pure from the contamination of Jewish inflitration. It hides ugly sectarian hostility.

I removed myself from the Iskcon ranks some 27 yrs. ago due to the problems you describe. If I would have continued to focus so much attention and obsess about as you are doing I would have gone mad a long time ago. Just because there was big trouble in the Iskcon institution does not mean that if we are sincere practitioners that we will not follow the advices of guru, sadhu and sastra. They advise that somehow or other we fix the mind on Krsna yena kena prakayena manah Krsna nishevayat. Focusing on the faults of others is not the perscription rather it is something to avoid like a plague. Even impersonalists, mystics, yogis and mundane psychologists know to focus on and accentuate the positive not the negative. The philosophy of Krsna Consciousness is that of acintya bheda abheda tattva, or simultaneous oneness and difference as espoused by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Himself. Just because the Gaudiya Vaisnavas accept bheda or some duality in the Absolute does not mean that we should become lost in the duality of this world. The practitioners of bhakti yoga are to analyze the world as the combination of the three modes of material nature. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur has expertly used this model in a revolutionary way in much of the literature that he has produced. I would recommend that you read his books such as Jaiva Dharma, Sri Krsna Samhita, The Bhagavat Speech and others. Anyway a Vaisnava is always gentle with others and harsh on himself and not visa versa. If Srila Prabhupada would have spent his time up on a soap box trying to bring down his godbrothers for the failings of the Gaudiya Math, then what would have been our fate?

Your logic escapes me. The success of Gaudiya Vaisnavism is not predicated upon the present ISKCON but rather the vani of Srila Prabhupada. He is ISKCON, not the institution, let alone the GBC.

One must always be alert to the corruption of false prestige especially where it concerns bogus gurus. They are the most evil because they deliberately pervert the spiritual Truth.

Just as ksyatrias are administrators they are also warriors. The war here is against false representatives who denigrate and distort Prabhupada's legacy and teaching. This is intolerable and should be exposed without compromise.

It's seems that you suffer from some mental illness that includes paranoia.

Oh of course. I'm imagining all the corruption, along with thousands of others who left ISKCON because of the GBC power grab. Luckily I was not part of it, nor victimized by it. The stories are coming from the victims, not my allegedly paranoid imagination. I have absolutely no stake in it nor I am afraid that they are out to get me. The illness you suffer from is fanatical denial.

For us to be good hearted and generous then we will see that it's just the play of the material energy. But for the perpetrators, they must accept responsibility and repent for their offenses to Srila Prabhupada's mission otherwise they are hopeless. Similarly all of us small fries must repent and accept responsibility for ruining our own spiritual lives and therefore being unable to really help others. This is why criticizing the institution is the flip side of defending it. The real path requires one to look within constantly and question one's own motives and this is called atma-niksepana. If an institutional manifestation of Krsna Consciousness has been relativised and this has become a thorn in our side, then we need to stop looking at it and proceed with just ourselves and perhaps a few good friends. To constantly analyze what went wrong with ISKCON after Srila Prabhupada's manifest lila is like hanging out and gazing at a traffic accident where there are serious injuries. This is especially pernicious if we don't have a positive Krsna Conscious alternative. Move along folks there's nothing to look at, move along.

I see no value in defending the perpretators or covering up the truth. That is precisely what enabled on the nonsense for so many years. In order for a problem to be solved in must first be identified, not denied to protect the guilty.

I'm not saying that roles of the sanyassis and ritviks translated into zonal diksa gurus. What I'm trying to show is that such a thing can easily be misunderstood and then such a situation as "Zonal Acaryas' can happen. But a spiritual movement's transformation in to a mundane organization does not have to be all black and white. It can happen completely or partially depending on the circumstances. The material atmosphere tends to erode the spiritual nature of a movement or even it's teachings, otherwise why does Krsna say yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati, that when the real spiritual teachings erode then I come to re-establish them. If someone like Srila Prabhupada knows this then why did he come to the West? Why did he even bother to preach? Why did Krsna arrange to send him? The answer is by causeless mercy. The real blame is on the material energy, for it is Maya herself that has caused so many problems and ultimately it is Krsna's fault for creating such a lila as the material world.

The process of spiritual advancement is gradual and certainly disintegration can be gradual or all at once. There were too many fall downs and too much corruption for the former scenario to be admitted. To generalize the problem as Maya or Kali Yuga is how ISKCON excuses itself from reponsibility, especially the protagonists which are the GBC.

I understand enough of Prabhupada to explain his teachings to others in many cases. But I dont make a claim to speak on his behalf.

 

He attracted to Vaishnavism Hare Christians like yourself, and "Hindu traditionalists" like myself. Jaya Prabhupada!

When were Hindu traditionalists attracted? At the time Prabhupada was preaching I saw no Indians in ISKCON temples. For the most part the Math disciples and gurus were criticizing him.

Christianity has no place in GV siddhanta. Do you see it addressed by the shastras or 6 Goswamis? And on the fall theory Prabhupada said very clearly: "The conclusion is that no one falls from the spiritual world, or Vaikunthha planet, for it is the eternal abode." (Srimad Bhagavatam, 3.16.26 purport.). But to attract Hare Krishnas like you, he also said that "we all come from Vaikuntha" - another "snake is a rope" trick.

Your understanding of Vaisnavism is so limited, so sectarian that one wonders in what way Prabhupada could be your siksa guru. You filter what he says to suit your sectarian biases, when even he up to his grand-guru Bhaktivinode Thakur saw no siddhantic disqualification in Christianity.

Furthermore to accomodate your narrow vision, you invent labels like 'Hare Christian' that were never used until many years after Prabhupada's samadhi.

Why would you think that Iskcon under Prabhupada's direction was a "purely material organization"? Also I think that the points I have made are valid. I can't see what you are driving at? What are you trying to prove? I question if you are on a search for truth or are only interested in being right?

ISKCON under his direction was not simply an organization. Under his direction it was the vehicle for his preaching mission. No matter how you slice it, the roles of the sanyassis and ritviks do not translate into zonal diksa gurus.

Who were the 11 Prabhupada named before they became gurus? They were both administrators and devotees inspiring others to take up spiritual life. Prabhupada was an administrator as well, almost to the very end. Does it always have to be that way? Of course NOT! Sannyasis should not get involved in management, money, and administration. It was all that material power that first corrupted the sannyasis Prabhupada initiated, and later on the gurus that he named, and the ones that came later. Brahmanas do not manage, and kshatriyas do not accept disciples and play the role of gurus. That was a wise system where the material and spiritual powers are clearly separated. Out of sheer necessity Prabhupada also acted as a manager, but he was not affected by the material power he had. I wish we could say the same about his young disciples playing the roles of gurus and sannyasis that he gave them.

What does that prove? They had administrative roles and to some extent that is what ritvik is. Your argument is backwards. You are claiming that these administrators could naturally transition to diksa gurus, when only the converse is acceptable, diksa gurus could take on adminstrative positions.

I really don't disagree, but I'm trying to show how management in a "spriritual institution" can transcend mundane managerial proclivities if performed in proper Krsna Consciousness. The problem - easier said than done.

This is chewing the already chewed. There is no 'natural' transition from an administrative purely material organization to the absurdity of the zonal acarya system.

Cooking for Krsna is really the service of Srimati Radharani. In the 1970's in LA we were always told that we were cooking, cleaning etc. in Srimati Radharani's kitchen. Therefore was managing Her kitchen a mundane thing or a devotional service? Why do you think that everything is so black and white. This doesn't seem to serve you at all. Devotees who see things as all or nothing tend to end up on the nothing side in the long run.

Don't lump me together with ISKCON. I am not a member. The dovetailing of pratical service is not the same as installing a guru as 'natural' administrator. This how subtly the deterioration of spiritual culture into a material 'business' - a wedding factory - a book distribution outlet can happen and it has, without anybody who hasn't seen the potency of the pure devotee noticing.

The dichotamy between management and the role of spiritual advisor is experienced in all Gaudiya Vaisnvava institutions. Maybe it is the nature of the beast since there is so much overlap in responsibilities? Therefore there may be no culprit after all. For those who don't care for the institutional approach to Vaisnavism there are alternatives.

Prabhupada made it clear that the guru is a spiritual function - not material. When it becomes material we have sectarian religion - the end of a spiritual movement - per Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja.

The system of "regional secretaries" was introduced in the early 70's and the purpose was managerial and spiritual oversight of various areas and reporting to Prabhupada on what was happening there. It was a good system, one that is adopted in many organizations of all sorts.

You speak of guru-tattva in a mundane complacent way as though it were an administrative organizational role. Nothing could be further from the truth. That follows of course if one views Gaudiya Vainsavism as a religious sect requiring validation inside a corporate structure.

You are an endless source of much needed humor on this forum. (I am not laughing at you but with you).

Read what I said again: "The zonal (regional) secretary system introduced by Prabhupada was naturally transformed into the zonal guru system when these zonal secretaries became gurus on Prabhupada's order. In itself, that was not a bad system. Problem was that these people were eventually corrupted by the absolute power, fame, profit, and sense gratification that came with it."

 

How is that suggesting to you that "Kulapavana wants to believe that the zonal fiasco was Prabhupada's real intention"? You are just inventing stuff...

You keep claiming unflichingly that Prabhapada had a zonal system. When exactly do you think he introduced it and for what purpose. He certainly had proxies or ritviks that would initiate on his behalf - that is far cry from installing diksa gurus who initiate on their own behalf and accept worship due a Mahabhagavata.

He did not make mistakes on major points of siddhanta. He sometimes told some of his disciples that the rope was a snake (as in: "we fell from Vaikuntha"). That approach worked for a lot of people who were too attached to the Abrahamic system of religion.

Yes you question his views of Christianity for one thing and the fall down theory. These are major points.

So now, you say only 'Indians' think Shiva is Jiva. And tell me, what are your answers to my Vedic Pramanas

It is an Indian thing not to be able to make simple inferences? I didn't say only Indians. I didnt' even imply it. But the controversy in this forum is especially heated among Indians who have very definite and differing views on the subject. And which Pamanas are you refering to and keep refering to? It is quite a mystery.

I have a problem because some sections of Hinduism are monotheistic too. So the usage of either of the two on Hinduism is incomplete.

 

Cheers

You said the terms didn't apply.

This is the truth which I knew about and many Prabhupada disciples who have long since left ISKCON knew without a doubt. They also know that the zonal acarya system was a concoction, based on flimsy evidence, a disjointed conversation on a doctored tape.

I understand now why Kulapavana wants to believe that the zonal fiasco was Prabhupada's real intention. He is a Sridara disciple.