Siksa guru as personal spiritual guide

[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]

>

> 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

[Guest guest]

On 06 Jul 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> 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.

 

My defence of sadhus may sound like harping to those who wish to dismiss the

point as having much validity or importance.

 

Hopefully, there are some members on this conference who will take my words

seriously, because there is nothing more serious or damaging to our spiritual

prospects than slandering senior Vaisnavas.

 

Do you take Prabhupada's books seriously?

 

Sincerely,

 

Srila dasa

 

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

potency of both real and imagined offenses towards various Vaisnavas.

[Guest guest]

On 07 Jul 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

 

> On 06 Jul 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> > 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.

>

> My defence of sadhus may sound like harping to those who wish to dismiss the

point as having much validity or importance.

>

 

 

I'll be blunt -- you appear to find pleasure in 'discovering' offenses in

order to meditate on them. Then you seem to feel righteous in dishing our your

own version of 'offensive' attitudes under the cover of being the merciful

sharp words of a sadhu.

 

 

> Hopefully, there are some members on this conference who will take my words

seriously, because there is nothing more serious or damaging to our spiritual

prospects than slandering senior Vaisnavas.

>

 

I've heard NM is a grand disciple of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, and thus possibly

a 'nephew' of Srila Prabhupada's. Yes, he is a senior Vaisnava, but simply

waiving NM's badge of seniority does not make his flag waving follower

infallibly aloof from the most basic principles of Vaisnava ettiquette.

 

Sometimes I almost imagine that you have a very real contempt for any

spiritual master who is not your own.

 

 

> Do you take Prabhupada's books seriously?

>

>

 

Well, I never read Prabhupada endorsing the blasphemy of either junior or

Vaisnava's of equal stature.

 

ys,

 

Sthita

[Guest guest]

On 07 Jul 1999, Mahanidhi das wrote:

 

 

>

> 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.

>

 

Simply a neophyte indulgence in a new brand of zonal acarya-ism. When a

follower of a recognized Vaisnava seems utterly unable to appreciate the

sentiments of other disciples for their own guru's, that is gross neophytism -

in my offensive little book.

 

 

 

>

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

> along. I've red this one already.

>

>

 

 

I've heard rumors Srila next infatuation could be with the Kashmiri freedom

fighters.

[Guest guest]

On 13 Jul 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

> On 09 Jul 1999, Vijay Pai wrote:

> > Prabhuji,

> > I find it ironic that you say the above while still upholding

> > Payonidhi prabhu as a terrific example of how someone saw the

> > light, accepted a shiksha guru guide, etc. In particular, Payonidhi

> > prabhu has _explicitly_ stated on the Krishna-Katha conference

> > that he believes that the jIva has fallen. He said this _after_

> > "accepting" Narayana Maharaja as a shiksha guru. What kind of

> > shiksha is this, that he feels fit to reject whenever he wants

> > to? Are you _sure_ that you want to uphold him as an example

> > for the rest of us to follow?

 

> The example to follow from Payonidhi Prabhu is the ability to be open-minded

> and learn from all Vaisnavas, irrespective of institutional affiliations,

and

> to take lessons from those who are by far our seniors.

 

Well, prabhu, there are two separate issues here:

 

1. the ability to be open-minded

2. the ability to learn

 

One who decides to reject a senior Vaishnava's teachings

on some issue while claiming that senior Vaishnava as a shiksha

guru seems to be deficient in #2 -- either the person cannot

learn or chooses not to learn.

 

Then all we're left with is being "open minded." There are numerous

such "open minded" people in any spiritual society. They come

to the programs and hear the lecture with a very open mind. In

particular, they keep both doors to the mind wide open and end up

not actually taking anything from the lecture. Then, when it comes

time for prasadam, they are again very open-minded (or at least

open-mouthed, and since the mouth reveals the mind...). However,

I hope you'd agree that this sort of open-mindedness does not

actually amount to very much. It's only open-mindedness combined

with the ability and motivation to _change_ something about

oneself (in practice or belief) that yields the sort of results

desired.

 

> The relationship

> with a siksa-guru is more as a friend, with greater space for differences of

> opinion. It depends upon the relationship.

 

I'd like to see some pramAna here. I've always heard that both

the "shiksha guru" and "diksha guru" are to be respected in

the same way. That's certainly what the Chaitanya Charitamrita

says. The friendly, differing-opinion guru seems to be more

like the "vartma-pradarshaka" guru who initially points one toward

greater realizations.

 

> Regarding GBC resolutions on the Fall, GBC "managers" have no business

> issuing *decrees* about philosophical questions. Only sadhus with sufficient

> adhikara have that right.

 

What is the pramAna for this second sentence? In particular,

even the guru and sAdhu must follow shastra, so only the shastra

can issue a "decree" about philosophical points.

 

> Similarly, without proper higher

> association (sadhu-sanga), devotion spoils into some deviant or lesser

> understanding. Choose your "wine" carefully!

 

Choose your "higher association" carefully as well.

 

Yours,

 

Vijay S. Pai