denying the guru's order

October 20, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Is it true the other way around too. If one's Guru asks one not to get

> > married, and one gets married anyway. Any scriptural references? YHS Vpd

>

> h

Yes, devotees got married and had hard times - to a great degree because the

leadership of the society was heavily influenced by misogynist early disciples

of Srila Prabhupada. Time for the soicety to grow up a little and not apply

instructions meant for immature bramacaris to capable adults.

October 20, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Is it true the other way around too. If one's Guru asks one not to get

> > married, and one gets married anyway. Any scriptural references? YHS Vpd

>

> h

Yes, devotees got married and had hard times - to a great degree because the

leadership of the society was heavily influenced by misogynist early disciples

of Srila Prabhupada. Time for the soicety to grow up a little and not apply

instructions meant for immature bramacaris to capable adults.

October 20, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Is it true the other way around too. If one's Guru asks one not to get

> > married, and one gets married anyway. Any scriptural references? YHS Vpd

>

> h

Yes, devotees got married and had hard times - to a great degree because the

leadership of the society was heavily influenced by misogynist early disciples

of Srila Prabhupada. Time for the soicety to grow up a little and not apply

instructions meant for immature bramacaris to capable adults.

October 24, 2000

Hare Krishna

PAMHO, AGTSP

Prabhuji, calling those disciples of Srila Prabhupada as "immature

brahmcharis" is bit too much. Srila Prabhupada did mention in his books

about the hardships and problems one might face if one gets married. Does

that mean he was only writing for some immature brahmcharis or for all of

us? Ofcourse, a good grihasta is far better than a bad brahmchari, but that

doesn't imply that everyone should get married or remain brahmchari. I

guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

Just my $0.02 worth

YHS

VPd

>

> "Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

>

> > > Is it true the other way around too. If one's Guru asks one not to

> > > get married, and one gets married anyway. Any scriptural references?

> > > YHS Vpd

> >

> > h

>

> Yes, devotees got married and had hard times - to a great degree because

> the leadership of the society was heavily influenced by misogynist early

> disciples of Srila Prabhupada. Time for the soicety to grow up a little

> and not apply instructions meant for immature bramacaris to capable

> adults.

October 24, 2000

Hare Krishna

PAMHO, AGTSP

Prabhuji, calling those disciples of Srila Prabhupada as "immature

brahmcharis" is bit too much. Srila Prabhupada did mention in his books

about the hardships and problems one might face if one gets married. Does

that mean he was only writing for some immature brahmcharis or for all of

us? Ofcourse, a good grihasta is far better than a bad brahmchari, but that

doesn't imply that everyone should get married or remain brahmchari. I

guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

Just my $0.02 worth

YHS

VPd

>

> "Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

>

> > > Is it true the other way around too. If one's Guru asks one not to

> > > get married, and one gets married anyway. Any scriptural references?

> > > YHS Vpd

> >

> > h

>

> Yes, devotees got married and had hard times - to a great degree because

> the leadership of the society was heavily influenced by misogynist early

> disciples of Srila Prabhupada. Time for the soicety to grow up a little

> and not apply instructions meant for immature bramacaris to capable

> adults.

October 24, 2000

"Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US)" wrote:

> Hare Krishna

> PAMHO, AGTSP

> Prabhuji, calling those disciples of Srila Prabhupada as "immature

> brahmcharis" is bit too much.

Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant to be

generalized is what is too much.

October 24, 2000

"Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US)" wrote:

> Hare Krishna

> PAMHO, AGTSP

> Prabhuji, calling those disciples of Srila Prabhupada as "immature

> brahmcharis" is bit too much.

Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant to be

generalized is what is too much.

October 24, 2000

"Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US)" wrote:

> Hare Krishna

> PAMHO, AGTSP

> Prabhuji, calling those disciples of Srila Prabhupada as "immature

> brahmcharis" is bit too much.

Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant to be

generalized is what is too much.

October 24, 2000

At 01:07 PM 10/24/00 -0500, Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US) wrote:

> Ofcourse, a good grihasta is far better than a bad brahmchari,

According to Prabhupada, a good grhasta is as good as a good brahmacari (if

by "good" you mean "following")

>I guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON gurus

delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

October 24, 2000

At 01:07 PM 10/24/00 -0500, Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US) wrote:

> Ofcourse, a good grihasta is far better than a bad brahmchari,

According to Prabhupada, a good grhasta is as good as a good brahmacari (if

by "good" you mean "following")

>I guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON gurus

delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

October 24, 2000

At 01:07 PM 10/24/00 -0500, Vidura Priya (das) (Dallas TX - US) wrote:

> Ofcourse, a good grihasta is far better than a bad brahmchari,

According to Prabhupada, a good grhasta is as good as a good brahmacari (if

by "good" you mean "following")

>I guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON gurus

delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

October 25, 2000

On 24 Oct 2000, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

> Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

> to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

> sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

> shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON gurus

> delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Also I have heard, that Srila Prabhupada said if someone is *thinking* whether

he should get married *or* not then he should better get married.

I do not have a ready quote on that.

YHS

Bhadra Govinda Das.

October 25, 2000

On 24 Oct 2000, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

> Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

> to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

> sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

> shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON gurus

> delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Also I have heard, that Srila Prabhupada said if someone is *thinking* whether

he should get married *or* not then he should better get married.

I do not have a ready quote on that.

YHS

Bhadra Govinda Das.

November 2, 2000

> According to Prabhupada, a good grhasta is as good as a good brahmacari

> (if by "good" you mean "following")

by "good" I meant one who is following the principles.

> >I guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

>

> Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

> to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

> sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

> shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON

> gurus delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Then again it's Guru who is delegating that responsibility to senior

grhastas.

YHS

VPd

November 2, 2000

> According to Prabhupada, a good grhasta is as good as a good brahmacari

> (if by "good" you mean "following")

by "good" I meant one who is following the principles.

> >I guess one's guru is in a better position to decide on that.

>

> Is that necessarily true? Do you mean that we need to wait for our gurus

> to tell us if we should or should not get married? I thought at least

> sannyasis (which is by far the most common asrama among ISKCON gurus)

> shouldn't get too involved in householder issues. I know some ISKCON

> gurus delegate that responsibility to senior grhastas.

Then again it's Guru who is delegating that responsibility to senior

grhastas.

YHS

VPd

November 4, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

My statement is meant specificaly to refer to specific statements. If a

statement is general, then it is not applicable.

We also see where the broader view of scripture shows that brahmacary life is a

midpoint and not an endpoint. It is student life. If during student life we

give no instructions on how to be anything other than a student, and treat

everyone leaving student life as a failure, that sets the stage for a high

level of failure in post student life.

November 4, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

My statement is meant specificaly to refer to specific statements. If a

statement is general, then it is not applicable.

We also see where the broader view of scripture shows that brahmacary life is a

midpoint and not an endpoint. It is student life. If during student life we

give no instructions on how to be anything other than a student, and treat

everyone leaving student life as a failure, that sets the stage for a high

level of failure in post student life.

November 4, 2000

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

My statement is meant specificaly to refer to specific statements. If a

statement is general, then it is not applicable.

We also see where the broader view of scripture shows that brahmacary life is a

midpoint and not an endpoint. It is student life. If during student life we

give no instructions on how to be anything other than a student, and treat

everyone leaving student life as a failure, that sets the stage for a high

level of failure in post student life.

November 4, 2000

One reason I didn't reply to your first response is that your first statement

was to try to position me as being critical of Srila Prabhupada. That was

counterproductive on your part. That sort of witch hunting type statement has

become way too popular in ISKCON and neo ISKCON these days. I have come

to

the conclusion that dialogue on that level is a waste of my time.

The second reason was that you then spent the body of the e mail making all my

points for me, basically agreeing with what I said. So being in agreement,

no reply was necessary.

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

November 4, 2000

One reason I didn't reply to your first response is that your first statement

was to try to position me as being critical of Srila Prabhupada. That was

counterproductive on your part. That sort of witch hunting type statement has

become way too popular in ISKCON and neo ISKCON these days. I have come

to

the conclusion that dialogue on that level is a waste of my time.

The second reason was that you then spent the body of the e mail making all my

points for me, basically agreeing with what I said. So being in agreement,

no reply was necessary.

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

November 4, 2000

One reason I didn't reply to your first response is that your first statement

was to try to position me as being critical of Srila Prabhupada. That was

counterproductive on your part. That sort of witch hunting type statement has

become way too popular in ISKCON and neo ISKCON these days. I have come

to

the conclusion that dialogue on that level is a waste of my time.

The second reason was that you then spent the body of the e mail making all my

points for me, basically agreeing with what I said. So being in agreement,

no reply was necessary.

"Mahamantra (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)" wrote:

> > Extrapolating that a specific instruction for a specific devotee is meant

> > to be generalized is what is too much.

>

> The above statement *may apply* In the case of Vishala's talks with

> Prabhupada.

>

> But with the talks with the 80 or so Brahmacaries under TKG's direction in

> 1975, It was not a 'specific instruction for a specific devotee' it was a

> general instruction meant to encourage all brahmacaries.

>

> Otherwise what other meaning can anyone ascribe to Prabhupada's intentions

> when he clearly spoke both in the beginning and at the end beaming widely as

> he spoke. "My Guru Maharaja, very much liked this brahmacari life." He said

> it *twice*. that means he was emphasising it once again for every

> brahmacaries *general* benefit in ISKCON.

>

> Please differenciate when you make those statements.

>

> ys MMDASBR

November 5, 2000

>

> We also see where the broader view of scripture shows that brahmacary life

is a

> midpoint and not an endpoint. It is student life. If during student life

we

> give no instructions on how to be anything other than a student, and treat

> everyone leaving student life as a failure, that sets the stage for a high

> level of failure in post student life.

While I am no brahmachari I have heard that if one can remain a

genuine brahmachari all his life , there is no need for him to even take

grihastha or the sanyas ashram. So how can brahmachari life be not an endpoint

? On the contrary it appears that grihastha life is a midpoint because one is

advised not to remain in the grihastha ashram

all through one's life.

Please forgive me for any offenses .. I am just a neophyte .. and please

help me out if I am wrong.

YS

Prashant

November 7, 2000

> > We also see where the broader view of scripture shows that brahmacary life

> > is a midpoint and not an endpoint. It is student life.

>

> While I am no brahmachari I have heard that if one can remain a

> genuine brahmachari all his life , there is no need for him to even take

> grihastha...

Yes, in Krsna consciousness there is nothing like post-student life. Everyone

is a student till the end. Even the spiritual master is a student of his guru.

Even a grhastha is a student and so on.

> > If during student life we give no instructions on how to be anything

> > other than a student, and treat everyone leaving student life as a

> >failure, that sets the stage or a high level of failure in post

> > student life.

This is incorrect. From this statement it looks that grhastha ashram is the

ultimate goal of the brahmacari ashram. The scriptures say that sex life should

not be encouraged because anyway people are attracted to it due to their lusty

desires. Why should a brahmacari be taught how to plan for the grhastha asrama?

Infact he should be made aware of the dangers of family life so that he does

not fall into the trap. Acaryas like Srila Bhaktisiddhanta tried till the last

moment to discourage devotees from entering family life.

Vaisnava dasabhas

Nayana-ranjana das

November 8, 2000

> If there was a case that Dhruva rejected Narada's instructions after

> initiation, then I would agree that Dhruva is an example of denying

> the guru's order. Narada certainly was a guru, when he first spoke to

> Dhruva, but he wasn't Dhruva's guru.

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you for pointing out the important point that surrender is

voluntary and cannot be legislated or enforced.

I would like to ask a question if that is okay. I was wondering about

Dhruva Maharaj's performing devotional service. At first he went to the

forest, completely determined to see the Supreme Lord, by the inspiration

of his mother Sunitha. Was he already aware of devotional service because

of being raised as a King's son? And how does Lord Krsna consider

devotional service to Him, before one meets his initiating spiritual

master? Sunitha was his first spiritual guide, but it was not formal

initiation. Can a person advance within devotinal service without an

initiating guru, but with instructions from a siksha guru?

your servant,

SD

______________

YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!

Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!

Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:

http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

November 8, 2000