cbrahma
-
Content Count
1,841 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by cbrahma
-
-
“Srimad-Bhagavatam – Canto One” by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta
Swami Prabhupada.
TEXT 27
TEXT
natiprasidad dhrdayah
sarasvatyas tate sucau
vitarkayan vivikta-stha
idam covaca dharma-vit
SYNONYMS
na--not; atiprasidat--very much satisfied; hrdayah--at heart;
sarasvatyah--of the River Sarasvati; tate--on the bank of; sucau--being
purified; vitarkayan--having considered; vivikta-sthah--situated in a
lonely place; idam ca--also this; uvaca--said; dharma-vit--one who knows
what religion is.
TRANSLATION
Thus the sage, being dissatisfied at heart, at once began to reflect,
because he knew the essence of religion, and he said within himself:
Thus the great sage Srila Vyasadeva, who is very kind to the ignorant mass, edited the Vedas so they might be assimilated by less intellectual men. Still he was not satisfied, even though he was engaged in working for the total welfare of all people. Thus Srila Vyasa, being dissatisfied in heart, began to reflect within himself. 'I have, under strict disciplinary vows, unpretentiously worshipped the Vedas, the spiritual master and the altar of sacrifice. I also abided by the rulings and have shown the import of disciplic succession through the explanation of the Mahabharata, by which even women, shudras and others (friends of the twice born) can see the path of religion. I am feeling incomplete, though myself I am fully equipped with everything required by the Vedas. This may be because I did not specifically point out the devotional service of the Lord, which is dear both to perfect beings and to the infallible Lord'."From Sw. Chinmayananda
In compiling the vedic mantras, Vyasa edited them into four books, the Rig-Veda, the Yajur-Veda, the Sama-Veda, and the Atharva-Veda. However, the systematic thinker in Vyasa was not satisfied with merely classifying the entire wealth
of Vedic knowledge into four volumes; in each volume he also brought about the harmonious rhythm, both in the arrangement and classification of the contents. He divided each book roughly into 4 sections; Mantras(Chants or hymns), Brahmanas ( rituals and rules of conduct), Aranyakas ( methods of subjective worship) and Upanishads (philosophical revelations). The Upanishads are thus found in the last section of each Veda, and therefore the philosophy of the Upanishads has come to be called Vedanta, “the end of the Veda”.
When Vyasa had finished his entire exposition of Advaita Vedanta in the Brahmasutras, again he must have sat back and thought, “Now what I have done? First I wrote a book, an un-necessarily elaborate book, which might be useful perhaps for only half a dozen people in the country. Now the Brahmasutras are written, maybe for three dozen scholars in this country. How can I touch
the average man, the layman, the man behind the plough, the mason, the ordinary worker?” He, therefore, evolved a new literature called the Puranas.
-
True, but anything done in this material world do conveys something material in the perspective of a layman. Bhakti is the final aim of any entity.Caitanya's opinion is the final opinion. The rules of Varnasram was created by the Lord only, to be followed. This rule, if we see in depth, conveys spiritual message only.
But in one perspective I should admit, when completely surrendered, there is no rule to be followed, but just waiting the command of Hari.
Very complex issue.
I'm not sure what you are saying. The Lord doesn't qualify his statements with 'fully surrendered'. He states quite simply and unambiguously that varna-asrama is superficial and totally unrelated to spiritual progress in bhakti.
How can material dharma bring us to a point of transcendence?
-
It has existed in the past, and it will continue to exist. Nothing to do with any temple or any society.All the companies of today's world are still following this principle. But blindly, not really knowing about its origin and benefits.
In the ancient times in the western civilisations, divisions were there in terms of (Noble, administrative, peasants) classes.
Even today... If I take a company I might find the Director [intellectual], security [Kshatriya], Sales and Marketing [Vaishyas], and manual worker [sudras]. But before things were done as a matter of duty, but today it's different, it is done for satisfying our own desires [the more we earn the more we enjoy, no matter with what means] and also with ego, thinking oneself to be the doer.
Varna-Ashrama is not as simple as it seems, many wants to achieve Bhakti, but many are still ignorant about the principle on which Bhakti has its framework.
One of the criteria of achieving Bhakti, is first to fully understand Varna Ashrama.
I don't think that is quite true when one reads Lord Caitanya's opinion that it is superficial and that bhakti is not contingent upon it.
In the opinion of the Lord the system of Varna Ashram Dharma is superficial only and it has very little to do with the highest realisation of spiritual values -
BY: ROCANA DASAMay 21, CANADA (SUN) — A weekly response to Dandavats editorials. Today's Obeisances is in response to the paper entitled "ISKCON and Varnasrama-dharma: A Mission Unfulfilled by Ravindra Svarupa dasa.
In this article, the Doctor is addressing the controversy in ISKCON regarding the establishment of varnasrama in a modern context. This has become a somewhat disturbing debate within ISKCON, and within the GBC body itself.
Both the author of this article and the subject he's addressing hold a particular interest for me. As we have noted in previous articles, the author (or the unknown supporter who submitted his paper to Dandavats) points out in the preface that Ravindra Svarupa dasa is none other than Dr. William H. Deadwyler III. Whether it be a written article or an audio lecture, most of the content coming from Ravindra Svarupa dasa makes clear to his audience that he has a Ph.D. behind his name.
Those who consume the lectures and writings of Ravindra Svarupa will be aware that he fancies himself to be the personification of the brahminical intellectual. As his preface states, he is most interested the brahminical (intellectual) class within society as a brain for the social body.
In addition to his academic credentials from a mundane university, Ravindra Svarupa also fancies himself to be the ISKCON equivalent of George Washington, in the sense that he feels he headed up the Reform Movement in 1987, which supposedly set ISKCON back on the 'correct course'. As for myself and many others who were actively involved in this reform movement, we consider Ravindra Svarupa to be the Benedict Arnold. Essentially there was no reform, in large part because Ravindra himself went over to the enemy in exchange for them allowing him to initiate disciples and become a member of the GBC. In other words, his status and power in ISKCON took a giant leap when he sold out the reformers, and he's been capitalizing on this boon ever since. For the record, I left ISKCON as a direct result of the actions that Ravindra Svarupa took along with his associates, such as Bir Krishna Goswami, who was also complicit in copping out to the Zonal Acaryas. But that's a subject for another article.
In his article, Ravindra Svarupa first establishes a certain theory, which he sums up in this sentence: "It seems that even Prabhupada’s ideas changed. " In other words, he makes the point that Srila Prabhupada was simply experimenting when he came to America and first introduced the concept of establishing a society based on creating Vaisnava brahmans who would live and teach on the highest standards of Vaisnava principles. He suggests that Srila Prabhupada engaged in "the method of trial and error", and offers an un-referenced quote from Srila Prabhupada, who supposedly said: ‘You learn from experience… and experience means you make mistakes.’ (We note that Srila Prabhupada said "you", and not "I".)
Based on this theme, the author tries to make an argument for the fact that ultimately, Srila Prabhupada's 'experiment' with varnasrama was a mistake. He supposedly entered into this concept as a result of the fact that many of his disciples couldn't maintain his original vision of establishing a pure Vaisnava community based on brahminical culture, and therefore needed to resort to or introduce the idea of varnasrama so as to not exclude many devotees, what to speak of the leaders who couldn't maintain sannyasa or even the basic regulative principles.
The spiritual reality as I understand it, however, is that Srila Prabhupada is an uttama-adhikari and a Sampradaya Acarya, working directly under Lord Krsna. As such, none of his preaching efforts were "experimental" at all. What Ravindra Svarupa is essentially trying to establish is that Srila Prabhupada's two "experiments", namely the establishment of brahminical culture and varnasrama, were unsuccessful. His argument is that the varnasrama part was a failure, and the brahminical part was incomplete. Of course, this conclusion gives the author and his GBC associates the empowerment to continue experimenting and speculating on what Srila Prabhupada actually means. And this is ultimately his point: Ravindra Svarupa dasa represents a school of thought in ISKCON that believes Srila Prabhupada wanted brahminical culture as he understands it to be: the establishment of schools with a very academically oriented emphasis, tests, buy-in from the mundane academics, etc. - something very similar to the way Christians have established themselves in modern society. You go to a mundane university and get a degree, and then you apply to be a member of some church on the basis of that supposedly 'brahminical' degree.
In many regards, one could say that Ravindra Svarupa actually falls into the category of 'hereditary brahmana", in the sense that the only real brahminical qualification he can point to is the fact that he has a Ph.D. As far as I know, he doesn't live a strictly brahminical life. In fact, he's been actively involved in the GBC for many years, and we know that's not a brahminical activity. While he's quite active in administrative duties, in certain circles Ravindra Svarupa is known as a very poor manager. Take for instance the fact that he's been sitting in his office in the Philadelphia temple for decades, while little has changed there, other than the fact that it's 'evolved' into a Hinduized version of the original concept Srila Prabhupada promoted. (See my previous Obeisances in response to Ravindra Svarupa's Nama Hatta in USA article.)
In his current paper, Ravindra Svarupa chooses to include a comment Srila Prabhupada made to a reporter, where he's saying that he came to America to "give you a brain". In other words, a society run by vaisyas is headless. He tells us that all the educational people are really in the employ of vaisyas, but of course, the author himself is also in the employ of vaisyas. I'm sure his congregation and the supporters who ensure that he lives a comfortable life are essentially vaisyas, and somehow or other, he imagines himself to be the brain.
It's my opinion as one of the Temple Presidents during that period that there was a natural division of labors in the temple. In other words, the Temple President and a circle of senior people would naturally determine very quickly how members of the community would be engaged. Some of them were engaged in brahminical activities, some in vaisya, kshatriya, and sudra-like activities. No one was called by these names… they were simply engaged due to their natural propensities in activities they felt happy doing. All were contributing to the whole and felt like members of the community, which they were, with very little gradation in status. It was only after the introduction of Zonal Acarya-ism that this system was contaminated and ruined.
The so-called "reform movement" of 1987, which Ravindra Svarupa continually points to as one of his great successes, did very little to change anything other than to put the emphasis on recruiting congregational members. These individuals were primarily Indians. They began to contribute the lion's share of the money and were generally vaisya-like. And like any vaisyas, they wanted control over where their money was spent, so they began to sit on all the Boards. The Boards increasingly began to run the temples like a business, and today we see the results of that unfortunate trend.
I think one of the underlying factors in Ravindra Svarupa taking the position he has in this regard is the fact that it takes far less charisma and leadership, of which he has very little, to run a temple based on his preferred model - far less than it took to run a temple based on the model that existed when Srila Prabhupada was present. The Temple Presidents during that era had to be able to encourage and motivate all different types of people. They had to out working on the front lines, not holed up in their offices, managing in a one-dimensional, lazy manner.
-
What makes formal varna-asrama impractical in todays world is the formal designations being laid upon people. In a world of sudras or lower we would suddenly see so many people jockeying to be designated as brahmanas and ksatriyas. What a joke that would be. It is an absolutely unworkable proposition.What makes the essence of the varna-asrama system absolutely necessary and indespensible in todays world is how important it is to the successful execution of karma/bhakti-yoga.
How can someone be expected to live a life of karma-yoga unless they can have work that matches the predominant gunas that make up their acquired natures? Krishna makes it clear in the Bhagavad-gita that each person must follow their own natures while giving up attachment to the fruits of that work.
The solution to this apparent paradox is to drop the formal designations while identifying the particular pyscho/physical make-up of the student by his siksa guru who engages him in and advises him in how developing a life plan of devotional service according to his nature.
People with this vision are the brahmanas and this is the reason Srila Prabhupada was first trying to develop a brahminical class. A class fit to instruct the rest of the world in how to do their duties in God conciousness.
Don't think in terms of imposing varna-asrama on anyone and especially not on society as a whole. That will never work. Instead one's spiritual advisor(s) must help the student into a proper suitable occupation for the execution of the yoga process by understanding their students particular sva-dharma.
We must be careful that in throwing out the formal trapping of the VA system we don't throw out the baby (essence) with the bath water.
Rememeber these 4 basic types of work are written into peoples natures and are far more then some academic subject or whimisical social experiment.
Very nice analysis. You obviously understand varna-ashrama.
-
There's hardly anyone who could understand it rightly, although it is quite simple. The quality of the congregation depends upon the purity of the monastery. The temple brahmins cooperate with the congregation in that sense that the congregation supports the temple. If the temple brahmins are pure Vaishnavas, the congragation would serve pure devotees and worship the deities in the temple. If a temple brahmin would have problems to live in the temple he could easily change and work in the congregation.Varna-asrama are the divisions of society not reducable to clergy/congregation. The religious dvisions, the asramas are not necessarily connected to temple living except perhaps brahmacari.
-
Prabhupada never used the word 'congregation' when speaking of varna-ashrama. That is a post-samadhi GBC concoction taken straight out of Christian churchianity. When I was in ISKCON nobody spoke of the uninitiated people who frequented the temples as 'congregation'. In New Dwarka a 'club' was formed called FOLK, friends of lord Krsna. There was also a 'guest' house. But that was before ISKCON got Hinduized. Since then, it has become a condescension to give some second class membership to the many Hindus who come to perform marriages and other cultural rites and give donations.
The translation of brahmana to priest doesn't capture the meaning because 'intellectual' is also an essential part of it. It not a spiritual ashrama so 'monk' doesn't really convey it either. Brahamacari is more like monk because the brahmacari is technically supposed to live in the 'house of the spiritual master' and serve him. Let's not forget that a lot of brahmanas are married householders, which is hardly a monkish state. The temple is not a chruch where the initiated are 'clergy'. What is the temple president? A bishop? A pastor? I don't think so. He really performs a mixed role of ksatrya and brahmana.
That institutional church concept has not any thing to do with varna-ashrama.
-
Mainly this varnashrama topic is rarely properly understood even by present ISKCON leaders. Prabhupada's real intention was to create a security measure since at that time around 1977 all his disciples were living within ISKCON, living a monastic lifestyle so to speak. When seeing quite a lot of disciples leaving ISKCON the idea of having not only the situation of monks living in a cloister but having access to a congregation outside the temple as well. All this became a topic what Prabhupada took into consideration. At the same time the congregation would support the temple in that sense that the temple would be supported with self grown vegetables etc and the preaching more related to practice. An interactive support of temple and congregation whereupon both would profit.Unfortunately they turned the who thing down and interpreted it as misra bhakti, not understanding that a congregation always supports the deities in the temple, is never something like useless outwardness or counterproductive to pure bhakti.
What does 'living in the temple' have to do with varna-ashrama?
Does living 'outside' the temple become a disqualification to a particular varna or ashrama? He had householder brahmanas and brahmacari brhamanas. In New Dwarka some of either lived on temple property and some did not. What defined the "Inside" of the temple was a matter of ISKCON real estate.
This seems a really trite and superficial reason, because there already were asrama and varnas being defined.
-
Prabhupada didnt' seem to have much luck or time to implement whatever he did put in place of the varna-ashrama dharma. Brahmanas fell down, or just didn't seem to fit their appropriated varna (yes brahmana is not an ashrama). The managers, supposedly Ksatriyas were also brahmanas. Many did not succeed in either. The amount of effort and conscious attention devoted to either attaining an ashrama or varna seemed to only distract sadhakas from the goal of spiritual development. I certainly never 'got it' and still don't. The caste system in India is a perverted reflection of true varna-ashrama, what to mention the democratic Western culture whose ideal is the classless society.
Lord Caitanya didn't seem to think it that important.
When he met Shri Ramananda Roy on the bank of the Godavari the conversation began with the subject matter of Varnashram-Dharma followed by the Hindus. Srila Ramananda Roy said that by following the principles of Varnashram-Dharma or the system of four castes and four orders of human life it should be followed by every one in order to realise transcendence. In the opinion of the Lord the system of Varna Ashram Dharma is superficial only and it has very little to do with the highest realisation of spiritual values. Because the highest perfection of life is to get detached from the material attachment and proportionately realise the transcedental loving service of the Lord. The personality of Godhead recognises a living being who is progressing in that line. Devotional service is, therefore, the culmination of the culture of all knowledge. When Sri Kishna the Supreme Personality of Godhead appeared for the deliverance of all fallen souls, He advised for clear cut deliverance of all living entities as follows. The Supreme Absolute Personality of Godhead from whom all living entities have emanated, must be worshipped by all by their respective engagements, because every thing that we see is also the expansion of His energy only. That is the way of real perfection and is approved by all bonafide Acharyas past and present. The system of Varnashram is more or less based on the principles of moral and ethical rules. There is very little realisation of the transcendence as such the Lord Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu rejected it as superficial and asked Ramananda Roy to go further up.Roy then suggested renunciation of the Varnashram-Dharma and acceptance of devotional service. The Lord did not approve of this suggestion also for the reason that all of a sudden one may not renounce his position and that will not bring in the desired result.
It was further suggested by Roy that attainment of spiritual realisation freed from the material conception of life is the topmost achievement by a living being. The Lord rejected this suggestion also because on the plea of such spiritual realisation many havoc may be done by the unscrupulous persons and therefore all of a sudden this is not possible.
The most important issue in this regard seems to be that whatever social class one happens to be in, one should not engage in false renunciation. Making a separate and focused endeavor to 'qualify' for an asrama or varna seems from what Lord Caitanya said a distraction from the goal of being "detached from the material attachment and proportionately realise the transcedental loving service of the Lord."
So when I see too much an emphasis placed on this material distinctions I become suspicious that there is a corresponding decrease in spiritual ambition.
-
Quote:<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>BY: HDG SRILA BHAKTIVINODA THAKUR <CENTER>
HDG Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur </CENTER>
Jun 14, CANADA (SUN) — "The Bhagavata teaches us that God gives us truth as He gave it to Vyasa: when we earnestly seek for it.
Truth is eternal and unexhausted. The soul receives a revelation when anxious for it. The souls of the great thinkers of the bygone ages, who now live spiritually, often approach our inquiring spirit and assist in its development. Thus Vyasa was assisted by Narada and Brahma.
Our Shastras, or in other words, books of thought, do not contain all that we could get from the infinite Father.
No book is without its errors.
God's revelation is absolute truth, but it is scarcely received and preserved in its natural purity. We have been advised in the 14th Chapter of 11th Skandha of the Bhagavata to believe that truth when revealed is absolute, but it gets the tincture of the nature of the receiver in course of time and is converted into error by continual exchange of hands from age to age. New revelations, therefore, are continually necessary in order to keep truth in its original purity. We are thus warned to be careful in our studies of old authors, however wise they are reputed to be.
Here we have full liberty to reject the wrong idea, which is not sanctioned by the peace of conscience. Vyasa was not satisfied with what he collected in the Vedas, arranged in the Puranas and composed in the Mahabharata. The peace of his conscience did not sanction his labors. It told him from within, "No, Vyasa! You cannot rest contented with the erroneous picture of truth which was necessarily presented to you by the sages of bygone days. You must yourself knock at the door of the inexhaustible store of truth from which the former ages drew their wealth. Go, go up to the fountainhead of truth, where no pilgrim meets with disappointment of any kind." Vyasa did it and obtained what he wanted. We have been all advised to do so.
Liberty then is the principle which we must consider as the most valuable gift of God. We must not allow ourselves to be led by those who lived and thought before us. We must think for ourselves and try to get further truths which are still undiscovered. In the Bhagavata we have been advised to take the spirit of the Shastras and not the words. The Bhagavata is therefore a religion of liberty, unmixed truth and absolute love."
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
-
hare krishnaAgreed. Committing offenses against a pure devotee is spiritual suicide.
-
Let me tell you, my initiating Spiritual Master and eternal Guru is certainly not fallen.Look, I admire your enthusiasm however it is better to glorify Prabhupada than ridicul others in the Gaudiya matha.
Jai Srila Prabhupada!!
Excuses excuses. Oooh it's a different story when the truth comes out about your guru. If you can't take the heat then get out of the kitchen. Everything that was alleged about Prabhupada regarding the child abuse applies with solid proof to NM.
NM is the blasphemer, not I. I merely report the historical facts.
-
How old are you? There is a BIG difference of living through history and studying history. Don't turn Prabhupada into some 'cult' personality and also stop blaming Narayana Maharaj.My only argument with him is about the origin of the jiva soul, that he foolishly claims originates from the impersonal aspect of the Brahmajyoti. Other than that, I was there, I new what went on and this is EXACTLY how it was.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>You have to have some understanding of history here. When Prabhupada came to the West, there were so many bogus gurus and sannyasis in America. And India was inundated with them; he was not talking about those he gave sannyas to.
If you were there in America, Europe or Australia in 1970, you would understand.
One group, the Ananda marg caused Australia's first terrorist attack in 1975, they wore orange robs and were known for their women sannyasis.
They tried to assassinate the Indian Prime Minister at the Commonwealth heads of state. In the bomb blast, two police officers and a council worker where killed and made healines all over the world.
Because of the robes, many thought it was us. Prabhupada vigerously criticised these other sannyasi bogus groups so that ISKCON would not be lumped in with the 'bogus influx of sannyasi's' coming from India.
Back then so many who took LSD declared themselves as a Swami. Most of them died out by the late seventies. Prabhupada was not talking about those he gave sannyas to.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Suffice that I was there and witnessed Prabhupada and his disciples first hand. Living history is a lot better than believing your biased accounts of it. I am thoroughly familiar with the ISKCON history up to his samadhi at least. After that I studied it. There is nothing cultic about acknowledging Prabhupada's elevated status just because others can't measure up (like your fallen guru) and have to minimize him. What you think about what Prabhupada knew or thought (without a shred of evidence) is inconsequential. He gave sannyasa to those who at the time were candidates for it. They deceived him and over time without his knowledge took advantage of their position. It is as simple as that. NM is giving him God-like status by claiming he knew things omnisciently.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Now Time to Take the Narayana Maharaja Bull by the Horns BY: BALAVIDYADASA
The case in point is the recent discussion about Srila Prabhupada's
knowledge of the misbehavior towards the gurukula students. We have seen
voluminous, unfocused, sastrically-inaccurate, and speculative
presentations by one personality, and the end result of his nonsense is
that Srila Prabhupada knew of the rampant child-abuse in the gurukula and
did nothing about it. To assert this is simply blasphemy. But the illogical
rambling presentations of this person are simply built upon the nonsense
conclusions of Narayana Maharaja. In trying to validate such nonsense, we
see him ready to use any kind of word-jugglery. Yet, he is only proving
that his association for "higher-instruction" with Narayana Maharaja has
simply taken him away from humble and chaste adherence to Srila Prabhupada.
Those that served in close association with Srila Prabhupada for many years
know that his overriding and deepest concern was undoubtedly for the
welfare of all those souls who had taken shelter of him. He was/is our
loving spiritual father, our "ever well-wisher". His heart was an ocean of
unlimited love and compassion, and even our tiny efforts at service he took
as a great treasure. When he arrived in the temple, we would see tears in
his eyes. His greatest joy, we knew, was for him to see us and smile. Even
when we were chastised, we knew his love was there.
For anyone to assert that this embodiment of transcendental love and
unbreakable morality knew about child-abuse and let it go on unchecked is
an idea of such idiocy that one becomes almost speechless. And to support
this idiocy with nonsense lies and word-jugglery, only serves to compound
the offense. And from where is this blasphemy coming: the camp of Narayana
Maharaja, and more accurately, its leader.
We also hear from the same leader that one needs a "living guru". Has one
ever read in any authoritative scripture that there is such a thing as a
'dead guru'? Every ISKCON devotee for years at every disappearance day
festival in the temple has heard the refrain of Srila Bhaktivinoda: "He
reasons ill who says that Vaisnava die, when thou art living still in
sound". And did not Srila Prabhupada firmly declare "I will live for ever
in my books"? Such basic tenets of Vaisnava philosophy are forgotten in the
camp of Narayana Maharaja; they are told and obediently parrot: "You need a
living guru". The blasphemy here is that Srila Prabhupada is a "dead guru"
along with, by implication, ever other acarya and devotee in our line. What
stupidity, what rascaldom.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->
-
You have to have some understanding of history here. When Prabhupada came to the West, there were so many bogus gurus and sannyasis in America. And India was inundated with them; he was not talking about those he gave sannyas to.If you were there in America, Europe or Australia in 1970, you would understand.
One group, the Ananda marg caused Australia's first terrorist attack in 1975, they wore orange robs and were known for their women sannyasis.
They tried to assassinate the Indian Prime Minister at the Commonwealth heads of state. In the bomb blast, two police officers and a council worker where killed and made healines all over the world.
Because of the robes, many thought it was us. Prabhupada vigerously criticised these other sannyasi bogus groups so that ISKCON would not be lumped in with the 'bogus influx of sannyasi's' coming from India.
Back then so many who took LSD declared themselves as a Swami. Most of them died out by the late seventies. Prabhupada was not talking about those he gave sannyas to.
Prabhupada did not consider himself above the standards he dictated.
Will Narayana Maharaja or his Followers Please Answer Directly?
BY: GEORGE A. SMITH
<CENTER>Kaccit tvam brahmanam balam
Gam vrddham roginam stryam
Saranopasrtam sattvam
Natyaksih sarana-pradah</CENTER>
- "You are ALWAYS the protector of the deserving living beings, such as brahmanas, children, cows, women and the diseased. Could you not give them protection when they approached you for shelter?
PURPORT
The brahmanas who are always engaged in researching knowledge for the societies welfare work, both materially and spiritually, deserve the protection of the king in all respects. Similarly the children of the state, the cow, the diseased person, the women and the old man specifically require the protection of the state or a ksatriya king. If such living beings do not get protection by the ksyatriya, or the royal order, or by the state, it is certainly shameful for the ksyatriya or the state. If such things had actually happened to Arjuna, Maharaja Yudhisthira was anxious to know about the discrepancies." (Srimad Bhagavatam Canto 1, Ch. 14, Text 41)
It is evident from the above noted verse and purport by the Sampradaya Acharya A.C. Bhaktivedanta Srila Prabhupada that the protection of women, children, etc., is indistinguishable from the highest cause, that it is the highest cause, and thus to say that Srila Prabhupada knew about the child molestation but did nothing to stop it because it was necessary for the good of the universe or the highest cause is complete and utter bullshit. The protection of the priestly class, of women, children, etc., is service to Krsna and for His satisfaction, and while a spiritual master may lie, cheat or even steal in order to protect them, it can never be the other way around, that a spiritual master can condone or tolerate any abuses of them for the sake of a higher cause because protecting them is the highest cause and service to Krsna.
Spare me the history lessons. I was in the movement before and during that time. Twisting transcendence to justify corruption is what the cheaters do.
My 'historical' research has led me to understand where this theory about Prabhupada's knowing about the corruption and doing nothing, inititiating sannyasi whom he knew where child molestors, came from. Narayana Maharaj. Of course that applies to NM without a doubt because by the time he was directly involved in ISKCON much of the corruption had been exposed.
Now Time to Take the Narayana Maharaja Bull by the Horns BY: BALAVIDYA
DASA
The case in point is the recent discussion about Srila Prabhupada's
knowledge of the misbehavior towards the gurukula students. We have seen
voluminous, unfocused, sastrically-inaccurate, and speculative
presentations by one personality, and the end result of his nonsense is
that Srila Prabhupada knew of the rampant child-abuse in the gurukula and
did nothing about it. To assert this is simply blasphemy. But the illogical
rambling presentations of this person are simply built upon the nonsense
conclusions of Narayana Maharaja. In trying to validate such nonsense, we
see him ready to use any kind of word-jugglery. Yet, he is only proving
that his association for "higher-instruction" with Narayana Maharaja has
simply taken him away from humble and chaste adherence to Srila Prabhupada.
Those that served in close association with Srila Prabhupada for many years
know that his overriding and deepest concern was undoubtedly for the
welfare of all those souls who had taken shelter of him. He was/is our
loving spiritual father, our "ever well-wisher". His heart was an ocean of
unlimited love and compassion, and even our tiny efforts at service he took
as a great treasure. When he arrived in the temple, we would see tears in
his eyes. His greatest joy, we knew, was for him to see us and smile. Even
when we were chastised, we knew his love was there.
For anyone to assert that this embodiment of transcendental love and
unbreakable morality knew about child-abuse and let it go on unchecked is
an idea of such idiocy that one becomes almost speechless. And to support
this idiocy with nonsense lies and word-jugglery, only serves to compound
the offense. And from where is this blasphemy coming: the camp of Narayana
Maharaja, and more accurately, its leader.
We also hear from the same leader that one needs a "living guru". Has one
ever read in any authoritative scripture that there is such a thing as a
'dead guru'? Every ISKCON devotee for years at every disappearance day
festival in the temple has heard the refrain of Srila Bhaktivinoda: "He
reasons ill who says that Vaisnava die, when thou art living still in
sound". And did not Srila Prabhupada firmly declare "I will live for ever
in my books"? Such basic tenets of Vaisnava philosophy are forgotten in the
camp of Narayana Maharaja; they are told and obediently parrot: "You need a
living guru". The blasphemy here is that Srila Prabhupada is a "dead guru"
along with, by implication, ever other acarya and devotee in our line. What
stupidity, what rascaldom.
- "You are ALWAYS the protector of the deserving living beings, such as brahmanas, children, cows, women and the diseased. Could you not give them protection when they approached you for shelter?
-
This might be true from your point of view. However, the bonafide acarya acts 100% under Krsna's order and as we see at kuruksetra there're sometimes things that look immoral or even demoniac. For example Krsna advising Arjuna how to kill Karna who was a stronger ksatriya than Arjuna. Agreed, you would say this is demoniac, many others also came to that conclusion. But somehow Krsna seems not to care, flies in the face of logic.And we can squirm like an eel, Krsna and His pure devotee are right by default
Oh yes keep feeding into the no-duality rationalization. ISKCON is in good order. All the bogus gurus are merely a pastime along the way, not to mention the child molestations. Collateral damage, like the rationalizations for the Iraq war.
Never mind that Prabhupada himself called the bogus sanyassis demons.
Never mind that he insisted that the spiritual master be perfect and untouched by the gunas , self-realized.
Nerve mind free will.
If you need quotes, they are easy to provide. It isn't a matter of my point of view.
-
He has found us. His name is Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada.
-
The only hint we get is at the end when he says, that he feels like someone who's getting poisoned.Yes in the end. That doesn't necessarily mean at the beginning he gave sannyasa to people he knew were child molestors. There is free will.
Its just like what I hear from people like Kula whose spiritual master falls down. They say 'Oh he was qualified to begin with. Really sincere but later..." So they see it like that- that one can begin sincerely and then decide to act demonically.
But to rationalize misrepresentation and crime as what 'comes with the territory' just to spread the mission is a demonic complacency.
Jesus said that those who would give scandal to the 'little ones', it would be better that a mill stone be tied around their neck and they be cast into the sea.
-
DEMONS TAKE THE DRESS OF SANNYASA AND ENGAGE IN NONSENSESometimes such demons take up the role of preacher,
mislead the people, and become known as religious reformers or as
incarnations of God. They make a show of performing sacrifices,
or they worship the demigods, or manufacture their own God.
Common men advertise them as God and worship them, and by the
foolish they are considered advanced in the principles of
religion, or in the principles of spiritual knowledge. They take
the dress of the renounced order of life and engage in all
nonsense in that dress.
(B.g. 16.17, purp.)
Our first business is not to forgive demons but to destroy the demonic mentality. The demon wants to kill Krsna and the spiritual master. That is unforgivable. BTW ISKCON persecuted disciples that were loyal innocent followers of Prabhupada and continue to do so to this very day. Because they don't accept the bogus gurus and the GBC they are not allowed even to set foot in an ISKCON temple.
-
This is a bit confusing saying, "to unqualified people".Fact is that there was nobody else, no other people more qualified were around.
So, you might say, why did he just refuse to give them sannyas?
Could be that the result would have been that they would have left anyway, and additionally criticising Prabhupada for not having given them all facilities.
Something like why does God create a whole planet for human beings knowing very well that these human beings are not qualified for actually doing something useful. Instead turning this planet into hell. Why God is so foolish to create everything for such rascals, giving them so much power to exploit and cause havoc?
We're supposed to believe that Prabhupad deliberately gave power to people he knew would either be child-molestors or harbor child-molestors and he did this to spread the mission. Right.
This must also be true of Sridara Maharaj and NM because they definitely knew about the scandals. NM certainly did nothing to circumvent these crimes until the law stepped in. -
It all started with this incorrect assumption:1. Only God-like uttama-adhikaris can give initiation.
Step 2. Prabhupada authorized me to initiate...
Step 3. Because 1 and 2 are true, I must be a God-like uttama adhikari!!
These people actually believed in all the above. It was not a demonic plot. It was just a case of ignorance and material desires for fame, profit, and distinction.
Many devotees still have the illusion that #1 is absolutly true. Thus they invent all kinds of bogus theories to explain REALITY.
2. is FALSE.
-
Thank you for reviving this very important topic. I think I am a sahajiya because I long to chant the Holy Name and they tell me (the devotees) that thinking one has attraction for it is a disqualification, so I don't chant.
-
The point is that Prabhupada knew about the corruption in his movement, saw it as inevitable given the fallen nature of his disciples, and tried to use it in Krsna's service.IMO the Iskcon of today is not that much different from Iskcon in Prabhupada's times. Actually, we might even have fewer scandals now than in the 70's. I think Iskcon bottomed out in the 80's and 90's and is now getting better.
As I've said before I'm not interested in what you think Prabhupada knew or thought and you are absolutely wrong in your comparison between old ISKCON and new ISKCON since I have experienced both. You have a need to relativize it because you are a traditional religionist which is sooooo boring and sooooo dry and sooooo cheap.
-
Before you go beserk, read the last few posts again, yours included. You started by claiming that Prabhupada did not tolerate corruption. To which I replied that there certainly was corruption during his time. Nowhere did I say that I blame Prabhupada for this. Quite the opposite. I said it was due to conditioning of his disciples.So what's your point?
-
You may have Krsna Candra confused with Kailasa Candra. I don't think they're the same person. Kailasa Candra doesn't hang out on forums such as this one, as far as I know. He does his own thing in his own arena.Who said anything about forums?
the varna-ashrama thing
in Spiritual Discussions
Posted · Report reply
But Lord Caitanyas mission is for everyone - there is no elite selection.