Siksa guru as personal spiritual guide

[Guest guest]

> Samba wrote:

> >We get what we really really want, really.

>

> That seems like another very harsh statement. Is that how you explain the

> horrible child abuse, domestic violence and murders that have happened in

> ISKCON too?

 

Surely this is just basic stuff. I mean everyone got on Glen Hoddle's case

(the British football coach) for saying that handicapped people are

handicapped because of their karma. So obviously no one wants to be crippled

or any of those other things you mentioned. We have desires, and we have

karma. We get both simultaneously. Sometimes we get passing desires that

come and go. But then we have yearnings. Depending on what we yearn for,

what we really want long term, the lord through his agencies will try to

accomodate. The Lord sees where we are at, and because he wants us to be

happy he awards us bodies or situations where we can try to be happy. When

at last he sees that we desire him, he sends us the means to reach him.

>

> One of the reasons I found KC philosophy so attractive originally, was

> that it could explain why "bad things happen to good people" - but the

> reason I read had nothing to do with *wanting* them to happen. It was

> your past karma.

 

Exactly, but both are there, its our entire problem. We desire the wrong

things. And by acting on the wrong desires we get more karma and it goes on.

Intellectualy we may accept Krsna Consciousness. but then desire gets in the

way, and we often find ourselves desiring sense gratification.

 

> There were so many reasons people took initiation from certain gurus,

> especially in the early zonal acarya days. Peer pressure, pressure by

> authorities, *no choice* of guru (combined with a belief that you could

> not go Home unless you were initiated) etc. are but three. Let's not be

> so judgmental of others.

 

I agree we should not be judgemental. But we should be humble, it is the

most important prerequisite for spiritual advancement. So while I would

hesitate to judge others, we can make a blanket statement that we should all

be humble, of course it cant be forced. Humility is very necesary for

spiritual life. A person who is actualy humble does not seek to defend

himself. Was it Jagganatha das Babaji who surrounded himself with fish bones

and alcohol bottles so people would thing he was a materialist?

 

So we were pressured into taking gurus, by people who wanted to cheat us. I

mean why else would they coerce us? Not necesarily all the devotees, but

certainly some of them had alterior motivations. But Prabhupada explains to

us about cheaters and the cheated. I mean Krsna is infallible right, he cant

be cheated. And he wants to help us. So if we were really sincere, then

nothing could have gotten in our way. If something did get in the way, how

could that be, unless we did not really want to surrender all the way. Maybe

we wanted spiritual life without the full surrender. Bhagavan once said "if

its not a thousand dollars (daily collection) its not devotional service".

So maybe some thought that you could go home for $1000 a day. Spritual life

is not that cheap.

 

> Please lets have some compassion here.

 

The things you described were certainly horrific. And of course completely

unwanted. They are obviously also karmic reactions, as nothing happens

without a reason. But that does not mean the the perpetrators do not have to

pay, they do, they are also guilty.

 

We are all guilty in this material world. Its a prison. To try to pretend

its not is simply sentimental. Compassion is when we remind each other where

we are really at. Compassion is the sadhus knife wielding, cutting through

the illusion, cutting the hard knot of material attachment.

 

Unfortunately this may be another case where the cold stark reality of text,

belies the motivation and mood of the writer. Mahanidhi prabhu sometimes

seems to think I am personaly attacking him.

 

I realy yearn for a time when we can actualy have a varnasrama community

where we can personaly interact, and prove our sincerity by actions rather

than words. Then maybe there would be little use for these cold impersonal

machines to communicate.

 

I agree compassion is needed, and we need to overlook each others faults.

But at the same time, the philosophy must be upheld, and we have to know

where the bottom line is, even if we cannot reach it yet. This conference

must surely promote both understandings.

 

Ys Samba das

[Guest guest]

On 29 Jun 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

 

 

>

> This I also agree with to some extent.

 

I also agree with your point, that those who require protection should be

provided protection, and not in name only. I was focusing my point more on the

so called intellectual class who find it fashionable to blame others for what

could very well be their own personal shortcomings.

 

 

 

 

 

>

> It is not a cop-out to expect leaders to implement varnasrama-dharma; it is

their JOB. Apathy will get us no where.

>

 

 

Again, I agree that we need to implement varnasrama-dharma principles based on

our experience and realization, and not a varnasrma-dharma in name only.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

> It's the sampradaya that is important. Over emphasis on what an individual

guru may or may not have been or what he/she may or may not be now, seems to

me to be missing that essesntial point. The connection made at initiation is

to the guru as representative of the sampradaya, and is not limited to the

guru as individual.

 

Over-emphasis on ANYTHING to the detriment of something else is cause for

developing misconceptions and going astray. I think this would be

self-evident. The issue at stake here though is the relative value of a guru

or sadhu. That of course, depends on the time, person and circumstances.

 

As a basic PRINCIPLE, however, the bona fide *guru* or advanced *sadhu* is

supposed to be the LIVING REPRESENTATIVE of the sampradaya. Without proper

and bonafide representatives, the SAMPRADAYA is DEAD or UNMANIFEST, to one

degree or another. It may be somehow or another surviving or continuing in

the form of low-level vaidhi-bhakti, but it is not expanding in a dynamic way.

When Mahaprbahu was present with HIs associates, they

performed, *prema-sankirtana.* In a similar way, I don't think we can compare

what is going on now in ISKCON to the spiritual energy generated in SP's

presence.

 

The association (ie, LIVING with them) and presence in this world of empowered

and high-class Vaisnavas makes a tremendous difference.

 

What do you think?

 

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

On 28 Jun 1999, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

 

> Srila prabhu wrote:

> >For someone as yourself who made the grave error of mistaking and

> >accepting a NON bona fide guru for a spiritual master, you display a

decided lack of humility, remorse and introspection.

>

> Dear Srila Prabhu,

> I was greatly saddened to read the text above. It does not fit with the

compassionate person I know you to be. How many of us had a *clue* about how

to judge a spiritual master when we first came in contact with

> devotees? I would have expected you to take a much humbler position and to

admit that you were simply incredibly lucky to have joined ISKCON while

Prabhupada was still on the planet. Let's not be so judgmental of each other.

 

Thank you for your kind and well-meaning feedback. I always take your words

seriously. I am also sorry if my above statement offends anyone. However, I

think it needs to be seen in the context it was made. If I were to sometime

see you chastizing your son, wouldn't it be a false conclusion to categorize

you as a stern or mean parent? Sometimes there is a need for strong words when

the situation is serious enough to call for it, no?

 

Lord Balarama is generally compassionate and forgiving, but he still killed

Romaharsana with a straw. So generally, Balalrama does not go around killing

people with straws.

 

I am certainly not comparable to Lord Balarama, but when the situation arises,

I see it as my service to refute any STRAW-man arguments of hypocrisy and

sadhu-ninda as much I possess the knowledge and understanding to do so. When

Mahanidhi Prabhu, like Romaharsan, began to disrespect a vastly superior

personality in a public forum (here on VAD), heedless of his own precarious

condition (having chosen an un-bonafide diksa guru and now without one), the

hypocrisy of his position becomes immediately apparent. He was therefore

begging for an appropriately stern response. It was my duty to reply.

 

The medicine should match the disease. I might have been able to phrase it

better or administered it with greater tact, but strong words were required.

Is your chastising of your children always as pleasant as the Vedic hymns?

 

Forgive me for the natural defects in my presentation. But please try to see

things in context.

 

Dasanudasa,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

Holy Cow guys!

Hey, let's all go outside in the nice warm sun for a while and plant a few

seeds- and see what comes up. Maybe even something we could offer to Krsna.

There's alot of mercy to be had living life on the land and it really gives

one a perspective about what is really important in one's life. Tomatos first,

then cucumbers, right? Someone said we should all tend our own gardens and

pull our own weeds. Sound advice. Anyways, I think the Siska Guru would make a

splendid spiritual guide, Godbless, and Haribol!!

[Guest guest]

>

> I am certainly not comparable to Lord Balarama, but when the situation

> arises, I see it as my service to refute any STRAW-man arguments of

> hypocrisy and sadhu-ninda as much I possess the knowledge and

> understanding to do so. When Mahanidhi Prabhu, like Romaharsan, began to

> disrespect a vastly superior personality in a public forum (here on VAD),

> heedless of his own precarious condition (having chosen an un-bonafide

> diksa guru and now without one), the hypocrisy of his position becomes

> immediately apparent. He was therefore begging for an appropriately stern

> response. It was my duty to reply.

 

So you have finally exposed here my "STRAW-man arguments" to

defeat so soundly, loudly and happily -- the fall down of Harikesa

das! He is still a "gold mine", isn't he? Can be exploited even

when closed down and dead. Even his bones are still good to

chew on.

 

So, I (along with the couple of thousands of others) am not even

a sudra, having no diksa-guru, never having any bona-fide guru,

no connection to Srila Prabhupada and the Guru Parampara ever

being there anyway, in short -- no real identity... So, "Balarama"

has mercifully exposed the hypocritical status of such a creature

to the assembled sadhus... He couldn't help but use his straw-blade

to cut off the head of that hypocritical nonsense who dared to speak

infront "Balarama" and the assembly...

 

Keep cutting off the heads around you, Srila. When you remain

the only one head speaking, then you can establish anything

you say as an undisputable fact and truth... Well, after all

this is your duty, being pure brahminical class of this society.

 

"My way or... a straw-blade guillotine"

 

 

 

das

 

(it's starting getting funny like this, folk... got no status nor

position among the holy ISCKONities, got no head even anymore... so

relaxing)

 

 

PS. to "Balarama":

Would it be any satisfying if I (and 2000 of Harikesa's "initiated

disciples") would take the initiation from some of the current ISCKON

preachers/gurus RIGHT NOW? I mean, Narayana Maharaja said that all

sincere devotees have already left ISCKON, and that all are falling

down now (sannyasis, gurus, everybody..). So, frankly, what would be

then the practical difference? Any use of such a step? Please tell us

*all* what to do. Without any hypocrisy, with an appropriately stern

response.... It is your duty to reply.. if you don't mind me to remind

you. You are a brahmana.

..

[Guest guest]

> As a final note, I always considered Harikesa Prabhu my friend and

> benefactor. However, we can mince no words when it comes to a proper

> philosophical understanding: Harikesa Prabhu is not, nor ever was, a

> genuinely qualified (ie, "bonafide") spiritual master, a sad-guru, capable

> of delivering his disciples to perfection (realizing their nitya-svarupa).

> That Harikesa performed wonderful service, helping and inspiring thousands

> of followers along the path and was a guru of sorts (eg, vatma-pradarsaka,

> etc.) no doubt. But a *bonafide* guru?

> We can definitively say not. Judge by the result: what is he doing now?

>

> Speaking frankly,

>

> Srila dasa

 

 

A guru of whatever category cannot be anything but bonafide.

Have you realized your nitya-svarupa? If not, does that mean Srila

Prabhupada is not bonafide? Of course not. What do you know if amongst

former Harikesa Swamis disciple some may have realized theirs? How can you

tell? If a fruittree stops giving fruit, does that mean it was never a

fruittree?

 

PAMHO. AGTSP.

 

respectfully yours

Trayimaya dasa, former disciple of former Harikesa Swami.

[Guest guest]

>

> As a basic PRINCIPLE, however, the bona fide *guru* or advanced *sadhu* is

> supposed to be the LIVING REPRESENTATIVE of the sampradaya.

 

Thus Srila Prabhupada is not anymore representing sampradaya,

and his initiated disciples in PRINCIPLE got no connection with

the sampradaya, since they got no LIVING REPRESENTATIVE.

 

Thus Srila Prabhupada is getting out the "picture"...

 

 

> Without

> proper and bonafide representatives, the SAMPRADAYA is DEAD or UNMANIFEST,

> to one degree or another.

> It may be somehow or another surviving or

> continuing in the form of low-level vaidhi-bhakti, but it is not expanding

> in a dynamic way. When Mahaprbahu was present with HIs associates, they

> performed, *prema-sankirtana.* In a similar way, I don't think we can

> compare what is going on now in ISKCON to the spiritual energy generated

> in SP's presence.

>

 

.... And thus Narayana Maharaja is coming into the "picture", as the

necessity for that LIVING REPRESENTATIVE of the sampradaya in

ISCKON. The idea being that the SAMPRADAYA is DEAD or UNMANIFETSED,

to one degree or another, due to the very departure of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

> The association (ie, LIVING with them) and presence in this world of

> empowered and high-class Vaisnavas makes a tremendous difference.

>

> What do you think?

>

 

You must be right, Srila prabhu, what else? As you have just

pointed out, ISCKON with merely continuing in the form of low-level

vaidhi, due to the departure of Srila Prabhupada, cannot fulfill the

need of above mentioned association. Well, let me guess only what

could be the solution.... Hmmm... I think, maybe... Narayana

Maharaja? Right, yes. I got it! What do you think?

 

(may I get beck now my head again, please, please... I am singing

the right song now..)

 

 

 

a-no-connection-to-the-parampara-ISCKONvadi-fellow,

das

 

..

[Guest guest]

Madhava wrote

 

> It's the sampradaya that is important. Over emphasis on what an

> individual guru may or may not have been or what he/she may or may not be

> now, seems to me to be missing that essesntial point. The connection

> made at initiation is to the guru as representative of the sampradaya,

> and is not limited to the guru as individual.

 

I agree

 

Your servant, Gokula das.

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 30 Jun 99 11:40 +1100,

Gokula.das (AT) bbt (DOT) se, Varnasrama.development (AT) bbt (DOT) se wrote...

>I reject the fruit as unpalatable, I reject the tree.

 

I think it is highly disingenuous for someone to judge another

(what to speak of that 'other' being a far senior Vaisnava) without even

giving him a fair hearing. As long as we go by current hearsay and not by

honestly trying to resolve our questions and doubts through genuine

inquiries, we will simply remain as we are - ignorant and uneducated as

before.

 

A genuine devotee always feels he has so much more to learn and is

especially keen to take advantage of the association of more advanced

souls. Indeed, Satsvarupa Maharaja goes so far as to say in "He Lives

Forever" (published lectures after Srila Prabhupada's disappearance) that

anyone who doesn't feel strong pangs of separation from the absence of

great devotees is as good as dead while living.

 

I respectfully submit that it is clear by his own admission that Gokula

Prabhu did not make an honest effort to clear his doubts and hear from

Narayan Maharaja. Therefore Gokula has insufficient grounds to make any

kind of balanced conclusion on the matter. He is simply going by his own

previous mISKCONceptions (about the fall of the jiva, etc.)

 

A great soul is recognized by *hearing*, not by one's power of speculation

which is covered by so many lifetimes of misunderstandings, including those

in the name of devotional service.

 

Even if there are marked "differences" between what NM says and Srila

Prabhupada as you suppose, as a junior, it is your duty to view these

differences respectfully. Otherwise, the Caitanya-bhagavata warns us that

if we take sides and thnk ill of the other senior Vaisnava, we commit a

grave offense. Please be careful and educate yourself in the practical

techniques of spiritual life.

 

"The impertinence of a puffed-up junior towards a senior Vaisnava

(maryada-vyatikrama) is never tolerated by the Supreme Lord." (cf, SB

3.4.26 purpt)

 

If you are actually serious about devotional service, please be careful

with how you view and speak about senior Vaisanavas.

 

Respectfully,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

>

> I think it is highly disingenuous for someone to judge another

> (what to speak of that 'other' being a far senior Vaisnava) without even

giving him a fair hearing. As long as we go by current hearsay and not by

honestly trying to resolve our questions and doubts through genuine

inquiries, we will simply remain as we are - ignorant and uneducated as

before.

>

 

 

A follower preaching on behalf of his master should not be considered

'hearsay'. I mean, what kind of disicple would make things up?

 

 

>

> I respectfully submit that it is clear by his own admission that Gokula

> Prabhu did not make an honest effort to clear his doubts and hear from

> Narayan Maharaja. Therefore Gokula has insufficient grounds to make any

> kind of balanced conclusion on the matter. He is simply going by his own

previous mISKCONceptions (about the fall of the jiva, etc.)

>

 

 

Didn't Mahaniddhi post many excerpts from NM lectures? In other words, one

doesn't first need to join NM's camp in order to get an idea of what is going

on.

 

 

 

> A great soul is recognized by *hearing*, not by one's power of speculation

which is covered by so many lifetimes of misunderstandings, including those

in the name of devotional service.

>

 

 

When someone is not inspired, that seems to be 'speculation', but when someone

is properly impressed, that seems to be 'hearing'.

 

 

 

> Even if there are marked "differences" between what NM says and Srila

> Prabhupada as you suppose, as a junior, it is your duty to view these

> differences respectfully.

>

 

 

Respect does not deny the opportunity to express one's honest opinion. After

all, why does anyone dare express any sort of opinion about the GBC, for

example. To some, that's not offensive, that's purifying!

 

 

>

> If you are actually serious about devotional service, please be careful

> with how you view and speak about senior Vaisanavas.

>

>

 

 

Yes, we should always be careful, but not just about whatever devotional

perspective we might be infatuated with at the moment.

 

It really makes me wonder about the quality of one's devotion when is seems

necessary to feed it by breaking the momentum of another in order to get it in

line with one's own.

[Guest guest]

Sthita-dhi-muni said

 

> Respect does not deny the opportunity to express one's honest opinion.

> After all, why does anyone dare express any sort of opinion about the GBC,

> for example. To some, that's not offensive, that's purifying!

>

>

Srila said

 

> > If you are actually serious about devotional service, please be careful

> > with how you view and speak about senior Vaisanavas.

> >

> >

>

>

> Yes, we should always be careful, but not just about whatever devotional

> perspective we might be infatuated with at the moment.

>

> It really makes me wonder about the quality of one's devotion when is

> seems necessary to feed it by breaking the momentum of another in order to

> get it in line with one's own.

 

I was not going to reply to Srila prabhu as he is entitled to his opinion

but thank you for defending me I really appreciated it. I was only relating

my experience with two of NM's disciples and leaving it up to the readers to

make their own conclusion. I can only imagine that Srila prabhu could see

that the statements placed NM in a bad light and decided to defend him, not

with philosophy but with putdowns.

[Guest guest]

> I can only imagine that Srila prabhu could see

> that the statements placed NM in a bad light and decided to defend him,

> not with philosophy but with putdowns.

 

Thanks for this observation. I let myself, a jerk as I am,

to hit the open trap. When the NM's own statements put

him into a dubious situation, instead of giving a try in defending

NM on the ground of facts and KC philosophy, Srila cleverly decided

to replace the focus of everybody's attention somewhere else - on

Mahanidhi's low class status and profile. I fool jumped on that...

finding myself only more and more entangled into the net of

debating/defending my own unimportant cyberspace-image, and shooting

back, thus becoming only more and more frustrated and disgusted with

the situation...

 

Credits to Srila for his success, thanks to you for showing how

to walk around such booby-traps, and boot-kicks into my own

rear end (as Janesvara would poetically say it). I've learned

something, hopefully.

 

 

 

mnd

[Guest guest]

On 01 Jul 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

> > As a basic PRINCIPLE, however, the bona fide *guru* or advanced *sadhu* is

supposed to be the LIVING REPRESENTATIVE of the sampradaya.

[srila dasa]

 

> Thus Srila Prabhupada is not anymore representing sampradaya,

> and his initiated disciples in PRINCIPLE got no connection with

> the sampradaya, since they got no LIVING REPRESENTATIVE.

>

> Thus Srila Prabhupada is getting out the "picture"...

 

On 01 Jul 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

> Thus Srila Prabhupada is not anymore representing sampradaya,

> and his initiated disciples in PRINCIPLE got no connection with

> the sampradaya, since they got no LIVING REPRESENTATIVE.

>

> Thus Srila Prabhupada is getting out the "picture"...

 

With all due respect, Prabhu, this is the same false-dilemma reasoning and

STRAW-MAN arguments that Janesvara employs to promote his views. The above

attempt to paraphrase my position is not at all what I am saying, so please

don't take the liberty to put words in my mouth. This is being *duplicitous*

and *cunning.* Are these the qualities you wish to cultivate in this

devotional association?

 

I might note you also add your own sting into the mix by casting cynical

remarks about Narayan Maharaja as way of deprecating him -- *sadhu-ninda.*

 

Without a living spiritual authority to direct you, who will point all these

things out to you? Without HKS who will you accept correction from? You may

not feel accountable to my un-called for remarks in this public forum, but I

sincerely hope you have some more qualified soul whom you can accept

correction from. Because frankly, you need it. In fact, we all do. This is

the Vaisnava principle:

 

tvad bhrtya-bhrtya-paricaraka-bhrtya-bhryta

bhrtyasya-bhrtyam iti mam smara lokanatha

 

We simply want to be known as the servant of the Lord's servant's servant, and

a servant of his servant's servant servant.

 

But remember, Prabhupada also states that "a servant of *everyone* is servant

to none." We must have some specific spiritual authority in our life

(sanatha). To say that Prabhupada is my only master is a cop out and

self-deceptive -- unless we are actually on the liberated platform. Until we

are liberated, we need all the practical help, guidance and inspiration we can

get from high-class GURUS and SADHUS in addition to taking help from the

previous ACARYAS.

 

Please understand also that I am not out to singularly promote Narayan

Maharaja. I simply want to advocate for a true balance of Vaisnava siddhanta,

of which the principle of SADHU-SANGA and SIKSA-GURU is of critical

importance.

 

I want to make it utterly clear that the absolute necessity of getting

SADHU-SANGA does not obviate the absolute need for GURU-ASRAYA nor taking

shelter of the previous Acaryas (SADHU-MARGANUGAMANAM). Srila Rupa Goswami has

explicitly outlined all these basic prerequisites by which to perform

devotional service properly (suddha-bhakti) in the beginning of B.R.S. Be

careful in how you may be deceiving yourself and misleading others by bad

logic and word jugglery so as to make people think we can do without ANYONE of

them.

 

GURU also is a very broad and dynamic principle. The more association we have

from GURUS and SADHUS, the more positive help and guidance we have in making

swift and sure advancement in devotional service. "Association," while

certainly comprehending all varieties of devotees, really means "high-class"

Vaisnavas -- equal to or better than us. What is that quote from NOI 5

purport? "Under [such] insufficient guidance of a lower-class Vaisnava

[kanistha], one can NOT advance very well towards the goal of life." The same

truth holds for GURU or SADHU-SANGA, since he basic principle is the same --

taking inspiration and direction from superior Vaisnavas.

Who is your designated master?

Dasanudasa,

Srila das

[Guest guest]

> Who is your designated master?

> Dasanudasa,

> Srila das

Dear Srila Prabhu, who is YOUR designated master?

[Guest guest]

>

> With all due respect, Prabhu, this is the same false-dilemma reasoning and

> STRAW-MAN arguments that Janesvara employs to promote his views. The above

> attempt to paraphrase my position is not at all what I am saying, so

> please don't take the liberty to put words in my mouth. This is being

> *duplicitous* and *cunning.* Are these the qualities you wish to

> cultivate in this devotional association?

 

 

You might notice that I did not say that it was _your_ position,

nor that it were _your words_.

 

I simply pointed out the possible directions that the kind of

ascertations that you presented might just easily and logically

bring us to. The directions that are not at al impossible to

imagine nowadays as something unrealistically to happen. Don't

you think so also? You wouldn't like someone deriving for

himself a bad wind out of your statements, would you?

We are just on the same side here now, Srila prabhu.

 

 

Srila Prabhu, I had found that you had unfortunately omitted,

by some chance, the additional explanation how your statement...:

 

"As a basic PRINCIPLE, however, the bona fide *guru* or advanced

*sadhu* is supposed to be the LIVING REPRESENTATIVE of the

sampradaya."

(and that otherwise sampradaya is unmanifested or dead)

 

.... was not applicable to those who have *already* been connected

to the sampradaya by the LIVING representative. Or to say, who

have had received a proper diksa already, in the guruparampara

line. So -- of no particular concern to ISCKON and ISCKON devotees

really. (not taking in account the propagators of rtvikvada, of

course, but I doubt you spoke to them here at this insatnce. did

you?)

 

 

>

> I might note you also add your own sting into the mix by casting cynical

> remarks about Narayan Maharaja as way of deprecating him -- *sadhu-ninda.*

 

I also might note you that the propaganda going around (in the case

you havn't heard anything so far) is that in ISCKON all gurus

and sannyasis are falling down now, that none is thus really

qualified to be a bona fide guru. Besides, I have personally

faced the preaching how Narayana Maharaja is the one to be followed

in ISCKON as the only *legitimate* acarya after Prabhupada. Also, I

heard that Prabhupada is being depicted as not the founder-acarya of

ISCKON, but just one in the line of acaryas in the sampradaya, so

that the next one (NM) ought to be now here as the *living*

representative of the guru-parampara for ISCKON

 

But I guess this is all just some hearsay, that made me worry

unnecessarily. Tell me that it is so, please.

 

 

But what was exactly that *sadhu-ninda* of mine regarding Narayana

Maharaja, again? So far, yes, I have been able to recognize the

constant repetition of the word "sadhu-ninda". I would like to be

corrected. But where, particularly...

 

 

 

--------------------------------

 

> [snip]

> Without a living spiritual authority to direct you, who will point all

> these things out to you?

> [snip]

 

 

> [snip]

> Who is your designated master?

 

Sthita's Timar.

 

(sorry Sthita, she didn't tell you nothin', wasn't supposed to be

public, but I got no choice here)

 

 

 

Seriously, Srila prabhu, but I have given you here 5 seconds of

attention concerning my personal matters. Next time will be 6.

 

----

 

 

mnd

[Guest guest]

> > Who is your designated master?

> > Dasanudasa,

> > Srila das

> Dear Srila Prabhu, who is YOUR designated master?

 

Sraddha, is this the same Srila Prabhu who visited us in Pregrada,

sometimes in '85? The one who traveled around in the ex-HKS' zone

interviewing sankirtan devotees, compiling the book on sankirtan?

 

 

Boy, those were nice days! All those visiting Prabhupada's

disciples gave us so much encouragement and inspiration to

stick to our bona fide representative of Srila Prabhupada.

They were telling us all the time how we were really, really

lucky and fortunate to have HKS for a guru, to get connected

to the Guru-parampara, got bona fide diksas..

 

Well, I trusted them. In that Srila Prabhu from one and half

decade ago, also. You know, I was just a fresh bhakta, what I

knew for God's sake who was bona fide guru.. But those were big,

experienced Prabhupada's disciples to hear from! They were those

who knew...

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

>

> Sraddha, is this the same Srila Prabhu who visited us in Pregrada,

> sometimes in '85?

 

Actually, putting now some chronologies in order, it couldn't

be that year certainly, but some years later. The very Pregrada

temple came into being in beginning of '86.

 

But I have now a clear remembrance of Srila: sitting in his

white doti and brown kurta, thick glasses, the highly raised

eyebrows, thin posture, light hear,... He was given a nice

reception, being the one among godbrothers of HKS that he

favored then - none who would show some attitude of disaprovement

of HKS as a guru wouldn't be even close to receiving such reception

and treatment as Srila was getting.

 

 

Anyway, the times and circumstances might be changing. The

faces as well. But something does not change -- you got to

again listen from others what you ought to do, and not to do,

and to which pure devotes the bona fide gurus one got to turn

to right now, or otherwise one's life is doomed and wasted.

 

There will be always some mahabhagavata to be pushed into

somebody's life as a guru. The same campaign goes on. The

higher one's rank on the "guru-list" is, that more his

supporters, adherents and followers will be busy running

around eager to increase the prestige of the "clan" by

getting more "marines" into their "army". Got the life

experience on that.

 

 

 

ys mnd

[Guest guest]

>

> I want to make it utterly clear that the absolute necessity of getting

> SADHU-SANGA does not obviate the absolute need for GURU-ASRAYA nor taking

> shelter of the previous Acaryas (SADHU-MARGANUGAMANAM). Srila Rupa Goswami

> has explicitly outlined all these basic prerequisites by which to perform

> devotional service properly (suddha-bhakti) in the beginning of B.R.S. Be

> careful in how you may be deceiving yourself and misleading others by bad

> logic and word jugglery so as to make people think we can do without

> ANYONE of them.

>

 

There has been no instance of me suggesting how "we can do

without ANYONE of them". This would be obviously a grosly

foolish thing to say or suggest, and a mayavada on top of it.

 

Making such a straw-man as this one, to shoot on, is indeed an

exemple of a bad logic and word jugglery in the attempt to mislead

others somewhere.

 

Why are you in need of it?

 

 

 

> GURU also is a very broad and dynamic principle. The more association we

> have from GURUS and SADHUS, the more positive help and guidance we have in

> making swift and sure advancement in devotional service. "Association,"

> while certainly comprehending all varieties of devotees, really means

> "high-class" Vaisnavas -- equal to or better than us. What is that quote

> from NOI 5 purport? "Under [such] insufficient guidance of a lower-class

> Vaisnava [kanistha], one can NOT advance very well towards the goal of

> life." The same truth holds for GURU or SADHU-SANGA, since he basic

> principle is the same -- taking inspiration and direction from superior

> Vaisnavas.

> Who is your designated master?

 

These are general sastric injunctions that are up to individuals

to find out how to apply them into their respective lives. It

is not the matter of some political application, on the way that

we can see, for example, the presidents of the USA are being

campaigned for the presidency (the highest leadership) over

the citizens of America.

 

 

 

mnd

[Guest guest]

Dear Sraddha devi, Mahanidhi Prabhu, and assembled devotees on this

conference,

 

It is unfortunate that my last text was lost during a city-wide power outage

(Y2K related?) because I began to offer some apologies and capitulatory

explanations to my rather strong previous statements. What with the holidays

here and another university power failure, I have not been able to respond

until now.

 

In other words, now that I have "vented," it's time to do some "relenting."

Reconciliation, compromise and understanding are important processes to

maintain proper association among devotees and to maximize spiritual

development - which essentially means diminishing our sense of false ego.

 

> We are just on the same side here now, Srila prabhu.

 

Yes, you are right, we are all on the same side. We have all been inspired by

Srila Prabhupada to pursue the path of devotional service, bhakti-yoga, as the

supreme goal of our lives, so we all share an essential unity of interest.

Therefore, in the spirit of devotion we should make it our business to

befriend one another, help and educate each other according to our position

and capacity.

To answer some of your queries:

> is this the same Srila Prabhu who visited us in Pregrada, sometimes in '85?

The one who traveled around in the ex-HKS' zone interviewing sankirtan

devotees, compiling the book on sankirtan?

 

> Boy, those were nice days! All those visiting Prabhupada's disciples gave us

so much encouragement and inspiration to stick to our bona fide representative

of Srila Prabhupada. They were telling us all the time how we were really,

really lucky and fortunate to have HKS for a guru, to get connected to the

Guru-parampara, got bona fide diksas..

 

> Well, I trusted them. In that Srila Prabhu from one and half decade ago,

also. You know, I was just a fresh bhakta, what I knew for God's sake who was

bona fide guru.. But those were big, experienced Prabhupada's disciples to

hear from! They were those who knew...

 

Yes, I visited Pregrada twice 1987-1988. I am sorry if I said anything that

was misleading. But we were all part of a system that was self-promoting and

self-flattering, weren't we? We were in a collective collective illusions

about who we were and what was our relative position in devotional service.

 

Devotional progress is not always on a straight line though. We have to learn

from our past mistakes and experiences and then proceed on a more mature level

without laying the bulk of blame on others for our own state of ignorance. If

we lose faith in the process of *sadhu-sanga* and create some philosophy of

frustration (such as "rtvikvada"), then what have we gained?

 

The path of bhakti is always maintained by advanced Vaisnavas, who are our

Guardians of Devotion on the path to continued spiritual success. There is

the BOOK Bhagavata and the DEVOTEE Bhagavata. Two is certainly better than

one. In the final analysis, however, while sastra is the basis, the real

import of the book Bhagavata cannot be understood without the blessings of the

devotee Bhagavata. Book knowledge alone is not enough.

 

Just because we have experience with "bad money" /"advanced devotees" (like in

former Yugoslavia) doesn't mean that somewhere else there isn't "good money"

(like in Switzerland). Similarly, just because we have experience with bad

"advanced devotees" (ie, "bad money") doesn't mean that somewhere else there

aren't genuinely qualified Vaisanavas (ie, "good money". Do you get what I am

trying to say?

 

I asked:

> > Who is your designated master?

 

Sraddha devi responded:

> Dear Srila Prabhu, who is YOUR designated master?

 

I didn't mean this was something we need to boldly declare publicly and then

aggressively canvass others about. It was more a rhetorical question:

everyone should at least know within their heart of hearts what advanced

Vaisnavas they aspire to follow and gain their holy association (as much as

possible). If not, we should, as Srila Prabhupada so often writes in his

books, be actively SEEKing out such advanced souls.

 

Especially, in the neophyte stage, this process means placing placing oneself

under the care of a particular senior Vaisnava, advanced devotee. In BRS,

this is what Srila Rupa Goswami means when he writes, *guru-asraya*. Diksa or

siksa, makes no difference. If your spiritual condition calls for a

devotee-doctor-specialist, you need to find a doctor, "properly initiated" or

not. Even if we are liberated, we require the association of advanced

devotees, what to speak of being an neophyte stage.

 

There should also be some *sanga* or association where one can go and interact

solely for the purpose of making spiritual progress -- not just to shoot the

breeze, air one's (very important) opinions, eat palatable foods, etc. -- but

to chant pure harinama, hear the bracing topics of Krsna-katha, perform

devotional services and engage in heart-to-heart exchanges with similarly

developed souls.

 

With a straw in my mouth,

 

Dasanudasa

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

On 05 Jul 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

> There has been no instance of me suggesting how "we can do

> without ANYONE of them". This would be obviously a grosly

> foolish thing to say or suggest, and a mayavada on top of it.

 

Then on what grounds can you insinuate that Narayan Maharaja is doing so by

trying to overshadow Prabhupada's position?

 

Do you realize how serious the offense you make by suggesting that an "honest

man is a thief"? How can you suggest that Narayan Maharaja has ulterior

motives or is misleading others without offering substantial evidence for

making such a statement?

 

In others words, with an unbiased mind, have you PERSONALLY investigated his

credentials and placed your doubts and inquiries before him? If not, I humbly

submit you, Gokula and all others who have spoken against him both jeopardize

yourselves and pollute all those who listen to you by unrighteously

criticizing a superior Vaisnava.

 

Again, I cite the example of Payonidhi Prabhu. Due to being influenced by

ISKCON's collective illusions and his initial impressions (misperceptions), he

had some doubts about Narayan Maharaja and unduly voiced them. Now with

sufficient experience, he regrets this and has repudiated his past statements.

 

 

Everyone would be well-advised to do do likewise. Let's be real scientists,

not gossipmongers.

 

Seriously,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

>

> Do you realize how serious the offense you make by suggesting that an

"honest man is a thief"? How can you suggest that Narayan Maharaja has

ulterior motives or is misleading others without offering substantial evidence

for making such a statement?

>

>

 

To me, constantly harping on this point almost begins to sound reminiscent of

the brahman who constantly meditated on the alleged offenses of the

prostitute.

 

I am not sure how healthy it is obsessively meditating on the comparitive

potency of both real and imagined offenses towards various Vaisnavas.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

> > There has been no instance of me suggesting how "we can do

> > without ANYONE of them". This would be obviously a grosly

> > foolish thing to say or suggest, and a mayavada on top of it.

>

> Then on what grounds can you insinuate that Narayan Maharaja is doing so

> by trying to overshadow Prabhupada's position?

>

 

(Narayana Maharaja is trying to "overshadow" Prabhupada's position??

Hmmm... You are using quite far-out expressions, Srila prabhu. )

 

 

Look. First you throw your "Tomahawks" on me for some nonsensical

thing that you claimed I was suggesting. And then, when you realized

that your accusation was bogus, you quickly turn everything upside

down: You keep the same nonsense as the base, but this time you

don't accuse me for "suggesting" it, but you accuse me for

"insinuating" that Narayana Maharaja is "doing so"! The "Tomahawks"

simply got to fly on their preprogrammed target.

 

What a mishmash you are making here. Not even a goat would be able

to swallow it now.

 

 

 

> Do you realize how serious the offense you make by suggesting that an

> "honest man is a thief"? How can you suggest that Narayan Maharaja has

> ulterior motives or is misleading others without offering substantial

> evidence for making such a statement?

>

 

What I am realizing is the presencs of painfully similar pattern of

intimidation that I have been noticing "around" since I got my first

contact with ISCKON and ISCKON's "more experienced members": One is

being drilled and drilled and drilled and threatened and threatened

and threatened...

Finally, I do NOT CARE! I do not care whom do you think that I am

supposed to look upon as a mahabhagata Vaisnava that I got not

to dare to form my own opinion on what he speaks and what he does.

If it takes me to go to hell, so be it.

 

Also, I do not care what NM's "ulterior motives" are and/or on

which way he is "misleading others". These are your own words,

so perhaps you got also some idea in this regard. I don't know.

You can yourself elaborate on it, if you wish.

 

 

> In others words, with an unbiased mind, have you PERSONALLY investigated

> his credentials and placed your doubts and inquiries before him?

 

I am not interested in accepting NM as my guru, so far, so why

for God's sake shall I go investigating his credentials? I don't

bother who he is, and what his credentials are.

 

My obvious doubt, being an *ISCKON member*, is wether NM is the

legitimate successor of Srila Prabhupada, the next acarya of ISCKON

(and thus the highest authority in ISCKON). This HAS BEEN PROPAGATED

BY HIS FOLLOWERS AND SUPPURTORES. And NM himself has shown and spoken

his intentions to COME and do what the falling leaders of ISCKON failed

to accomplish according to NM's expectations. If you wish you can beat

my head all bloody with your "NO EVIDENCE, NO EVIDENCE". Who cares.

Some say it's all my bad karma anyway. I tend to belive it.

 

 

> If not, I

> humbly submit you, Gokula and all others who have spoken against him both

> jeopardize yourselves and pollute all those who listen to you by

> unrighteously criticizing a superior Vaisnava.

>

 

Yes, expressing unwillingness to surrender to the promotion of

Narayana Maharaja as the next acarya in ISCKON, as propagated

by his followers and supporters, has become a SADHU-NINDHA.

 

Me, Gokula, and all those others, have committed the crime of -- not

accepting. Not accepting Narayana Maharaja as propagated by his

adherents. Shoot us all. That's also the way to stay right in

whatever you wish to say. Throw your Tomahawks on "unbelievers".

 

 

> Again, I cite the example of Payonidhi Prabhu. Due to being influenced by

> ISKCON's collective illusions and his initial impressions

> (misperceptions), he had some doubts about Narayan Maharaja and unduly

> voiced them. Now with sufficient experience, he regrets this and has

> repudiated his past statements.

>

 

I have had just a half hour ago two Jehovah Witnesses members

on my door. Seriously. They are pretty like you here -- they got

their blind eye for everything and everybody else but *theirs*.

 

 

So many others have also had their doubts, and have PERSONALLY

met NM. And they feel and conclude just **differently** as you

and your body, Payonidhi, feel about. But you will not cite their

examples. You will IGNORE them. So you and your "Jagai" Payonidhi

may be ignored as well. For the sake of playing a fair game.

 

It's all too "Jehovistic" to me to swallow it, sorry. Only they

are perfectly right in their perceptions, and everybody else who

doesn't accept theirs is in deep illusion and a hopeless case,

and doomed, and everything else.

(Well, I tried to be nice to them, I even took their brochures,

but gonna pay my mistake, I tell you... Will have them on my door

next week again, you can bet on it, and the next week, and the

next... )

 

 

>

> Everyone would be well-advised to do do likewise. Let's be real

> scientists, not gossipmongers.

 

Yes. Keep good work. See you next week. Bring few new brochures

along. I've red this one already.

 

 

 

mnd

[Guest guest]

>

> Yes, I visited Pregrada twice 1987-1988. I am sorry if I said anything

> that was misleading. But we were all part of a system that was

> self-promoting and self-flattering, weren't we? We were in a collective

> collective illusions about who we were and what was our relative position

> in devotional service.

 

 

Thus, objectively speaking, the only way for a newcomer to

escape being blamed for a poor judgment and committing

a grave mistake of accepting a non-mahabhagavata for a guru,

was to avoid joining ISCKON after the departure of Srila

Prabhupada. To stay away from that collectively illusioned

society, in other words.

 

If I would really have now to search for my grave mistake, then

it wouldn't be my bad choice of a guru. But my bad choice of a

society. You don't even need to be any familiar with the ISCKON

life to have the glimpse into what I am talking about. Namely,

accepting the prominent sect leaders as your spiritual authorities

is not really the wrong step once you have accepted the sect as your

"home". It is simply the *next logical* step that you got no choice

of avoiding, once you have done that initial step of crossing the

doorway of some ISCKON Hare Krsna temple.

 

 

 

>

> Just because we have experience with "bad money" /"advanced devotees"

> (like in former Yugoslavia) doesn't mean that somewhere else there isn't

> "good money" (like in Switzerland). Similarly, just because we have

> experience with bad "advanced devotees" (ie, "bad money") doesn't mean

> that somewhere else there aren't genuinely qualified Vaisanavas (ie, "good

> money". Do you get what I am trying to say?

 

Why don't you rather base the idea on some more explicit

philosophical concept?

 

Money is not bad unless a falsification. Though the Swiss banks

certainly got more money than the banks of former YU, still the

money is money. It is the quantity what makes the difference.

So, it is neither "bad" nor "good". Same money. Just *more potent*

if in bigger quantity. Do you, in turn, get what I am trying to say?

 

 

 

> > Dear Srila Prabhu, who is YOUR designated master?

>

>

> I didn't mean this was something we need to boldly declare publicly and

> then aggressively canvass others about.

 

Right. Keep your privacy away from public. You seem to know well

how things can go.

 

 

> It was more a rhetorical

> question: everyone should at least know within their heart of hearts what

> advanced Vaisnavas they aspire to follow and gain their holy association

> (as much as possible). If not, we should, as Srila Prabhupada so often

> writes in his books, be actively SEEKing out such advanced souls.

 

Right. So if somebody wants to follow Narayana Maharaja, then

let him/her do it. If somebody doesn't want, then let him/her

not do it. You follow whom ever you wish. Nobody is preventing

you from that, obviously. Not even this (in)famous GBC.

 

 

 

 

- mnd