Looking for Non Iskcon Vaisnava association

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

 

But if you find what you are looking for within ISKCON, there is no problem with that as well.

 

 

I repeat this last sentence, in case it was overlooked.

 

 

Vikram is just an armchair devotee who really doen't have any history of practical service and sacrifice in the mission of Mahaprabhu, so he is not a good person to be taking advice from concerning the matter of Vaishnava assocation.

 

I suppose Guruvani is quite the opposite of me, and has a tremendous history of service - HE HE HE HE. Who would want to take any sort of advice whatsoever from a semi-senile, frustrated wannabe mleccha? Just go back to your roots, i.e hamburgers and slurpees, pal.

[Beggar 0]

 

 

Vikram is just an armchair devotee who really doen't have any history of practical service and sacrifice in the mission of Mahaprabhu, so he is not a good person to be taking advice from concerning the matter of Vaishnava assocation.

Further proof that Guruvani although not one of the original Rtvik brahmanas is actually Krsna's representative. He moves in a zig zag way.

[Guruvani 0]

 

 

 

I suppose Guruvani is quite the opposite of me, and has a tremendous history of service - HE HE HE HE. Who would want to take any sort of advice whatsoever from a semi-senile, frustrated wannabe mleccha? Just go back to your roots, i.e hamburgers and slurpees, pal.

 

I am not going to boast about my years of austerity, penance and strict sadhana as a brahmacary.

 

Why is apparent is that Vikram is a householder devotee whose only experience in Vaishnavism is as an armchair bhakta who is pre-occupied with broadcasting negative propaganda against the international Gaudiya mission that has spread the message of Mahaprabhu to all the countries of the world.

 

His message is one of a diseased mis-informed outsider who really has no position to actually speak anything about the level of Gaudiya sadacar that is practiced in ISKCON.

 

He has fashioned an evil ISKCON straw-man and is now dedicated to attacking this evil demon that he has given birth to in his own mind.

[Laulyam 0]

Prologue

by Bhaktivinoda Thakura

 

 

 

It was after this that some of the jealous and low-minded brahmanas of Kulia picked a quarrel with Mahaprabhu and collected a party to oppose him. Nimai Pandita was naturally a soft-hearted person, though strong in his principles. He declared that party feelings and sectarianism were the two great enemies of progress and that as long as he should continue to be an inhabitant of Nadia belonging to a certain family, his mission would not meet with complete success. He then resolved to be a citizen of the world by cutting his connection with his particular family, caste and creed, and with this resolution he embraced the position of a sannyasi at Katwa, under the guidance of Kesava Bharati of that town, on the 24th year of his age. His mother and wife wept bitterly for his separation, but our hero, though soft in heart, was a strong person in principle. He left his little world in his house for the unlimited spiritual world of Krsna with man in general.

[Laulyam 0]

Text 22 khalata dasame laksya kaliye sarpa-rupake

sampradaya-virdho yam davanalo vicintyate

 

Kaliya's malice always pollutes the water of the Yamuna, which is the spiritual liquid of the Vaisnavas. It is everyone's duty to give up this tenth obstacle [see Appendix C]. The eleventh obstacle of the Vaisnavas is sectarianism, which takes the shape of the forest fire.

Due to sectarianism a person cannot accept anyone outside of his own group as a Vaisnava, and a result he faces many obstacles in finding a guru and associating with devotees. Therefore extinguising the forest fire is most important.

 

Appendix C

<CENTER>The Serpent Kaliya

 

</CENTER>The following essay was printed in the May 1932 edition of

The Harmonist, or Sree Sajjanatoshani.

 

There is a beautiful lake of very sweet water in the Yamuna which bears the name of Kaliya. This lake happened to be infested by a most venomous Serpent from whom the lake derives its name. On a certain day while the cow-boys of Braja were out pasturing their calves on the wooded banks of the Yamuna they happened to feel thirsty and not knowing that the water of the lake had been poisoned by Kaliya drank of its water which resulted in their instantaneous death. On being apprised of their plight Krishna came to the spot and restored them to life.

Thereafter Krishna got down into the lake with the intention of sporting in its water. This enraged the hideous monster who forthwith came out of the depths of the lake in the company of his adherents and fell upon Krishna coiling Him up in their great hoods for Kaliya was a thousand-hooded Serpent and his brood were equally formidable.

Thus attacked by Kaliya with his whole brood Krishna appeared to faint away under their murderous onslaught. On seeing Him apparently slain by His enemies the cow-boys and all the assembled milkmen filled the air with their loud lamentations. But Krishna soon showed that He was quite safe and He forthwith climbed up the hoods of Kaliya and began to dance on his thousand heads. He danced in an infinite variety of the most marvelous of figures. The pressure of Krishna's Feet crushed the towering pride of the myriad-hooded monster. Kaliya lowered his hoods and vomited blood. But the Dance of Krishna did not cease. Kaliya was found tottering towards death when his wives came out of the lake and with palms joined in prayer begged Krishna to spare the life of their husband. The prayers of the wives of Kaliya who had faith in Krishna moved the Son of Nanda to have mercy on Kaliya. Krishna now desisted from His terrific Dance on condition that Kaliya was to quit the lake at once and to betake himself to his original home in the island of Ramanaka. Krishna gave him His assurance that Garuda would now do him no harm as he would respect the print of His Feet on hoods of Kaliya. The water of the Kaliya lake was now rendered immune from all poison and became as sweet as it was before the advent of Kaliya.

The taming of Kaliya is one of the Brindaban Pastimes of Boy-Krishna. Kaliya is the type of cunning and malice. He is the embodiment of unrelenting cruelty. There is no place for Kaliya in the happy realm of Braja. Deceit and cruelty are as poison to the artless loving nature of the denizens of Braja. It is quite conceivable for the confiding chums of Krishna not to entertain any suspicion regarding the malicious intention of cruel and deceitful persons whose purpose is to poison them against Krishna. They may even unwittingly fall into the counsel of such evil persons. But Krishna is sure to rescue His Own from the wiles of His enemy.

 

Nay Krishna has also a plan for curing the evil propensity of Kaliya himself. The process consists in making him feel the touches of His Dancing Feet. But Kaliya attempts to bear up against all curative chastisement. Instead of feeling the joy of supporting the Feet of Krishna on his nasty hoods the monster finds it impossible to bear his good fortune without undergoing the pangs of actual death. Even the loyal wives of Kaliya who desire the reformation of the monster and whose good wishes for his well-being are the cause of Krishna's mercy towards him are at last forced to intercede by a prayer for his banishment from the realm of Braja. But the pride of Kaliya had received a mortal check.

 

The banishment of Kaliya from the lake of the Yamuna has a most important spiritual significance. Those who have a purpose to create trouble among the pure devotees of Krishna by infecting their nature with their own malicious disposition meet with a certain degree of initial success in their nefarious undertaking. This emboldens them to make a direct attack on Krishna Himself when He appears on the scene of their depraved activities in order to restore the living faith of His Own bonafide associates.

 

Those who are not exceedingly clever can never be servants of Krishna. But the service of Krishna is also never available to those whose cunning is employed for depriving Krishna of the fullness of His enjoyment. Kaliya and those who are actuated by a naturally malicious disposition are also styled clever in the ordinary phraseology of this damned world. Such rascals may also have the impudence of taking their stand upon the texts of the Scriptures by using their cunning in the graceless attempt of depriving Krishna of the service His Own. This kind of conduct may also pass undetected and may even be regarded as possessing the perfect skill of confidential service. But Krishna is sure to expose the real nature of the villainy just at the moment when it has been successful in misleading His best-beloved ones.

 

It is, indeed, very difficult to understand the Ways of Krishna. Krishna apparently permits almost every form of offense to be perpetrated with impunity against His most beloved ones. This has the effect of providing an opportunity to His Own for proving their incomparable love for Himself and by means of this unique exhibition of their love to defeat in the most fruitful manner the machinations of His worst enemies. The friends and chums of Krishna are offered to the malice of cunning and relentless brutes in order to bring out the difference between the two and thereby enable the latter to desist from troubling the devotees of their own accord.

 

But these brutes are never allowed to associate with the servants of Krishna even after they forego their malice towards them. They are eternally debarred from the service of Krishna in Braja. But the touch of Krishna's Feet makes a real difference between the recipient of His mercy and the other brutes. Kaliya is no longer regarded by Garuda as the enemy of Krishna. Kaliya is, therefore, allowed a place among the protected of Krishna.

 

It does not follow that it is a paying business to poison the hearts of His servants against Krishna which is sure to be rewarded by the grant of His protection. Yes, this is so after the pride of the miscreant is thoroughly broken by being trod upon by Krishna Himself. His is thereby inspired with a most wholesome dread which effectively prevents him from trying to breed mischief among the bonafide devotees by owning an unwilling allegiance to Krishna and assuming the badge of His servitude by wearing on his head the print of His lotus Feet.

 

The mercy shown to Kaliya is so obviously and disproportionately great in its magnitude in face of the extreme gravity of his offense that no rationalistic explanation can do justice to its full beneficent significance.

[Guest guest]

Iskcon is like tatashta-shakti. I believe most just stay there.

However, u can go back to maya or to Vaishnavism (any type of it).

[Vikram Ramsundar 0]

 

I am not going to boast about my years of austerity, penance and strict sadhana as a brahmacary.

 

Why is apparent is that Vikram is a householder devotee whose only experience in Vaishnavism is as an armchair bhakta who is pre-occupied with broadcasting negative propaganda against the international Gaudiya mission that has spread the message of Mahaprabhu to all the countries of the world.

 

His message is one of a diseased mis-informed outsider who really has no position to actually speak anything about the level of Gaudiya sadacar that is practiced in ISKCON.

 

He has fashioned an evil ISKCON straw-man and is now dedicated to attacking this evil demon that he has given birth to in his own mind.

 

 

Once more, Guruvani, you write about things which you do not know as if you do (typical of you anyways). You mentioned Mahanidhi Swami and Pundarika Vidyanidhi as good ISKCON Vaisnavas, which is absolutely correct. In addition to them, I can lengthen this list for you considerably: Indradyumna Maharaja, Jayadvaita Maharaja, Bhumipati dasa, Isvara dasa, Jaya Vijaya dasa, Deena Bandhu dasa, Sadaputa dasa, Maha-Visnu dasa (a Mauritian devotee) to name just a few. Regarding Mahanidhi, though, he would be even better if he could refrain from cribbing the translations of Gadadhara Prana dasa and pass them as his own work. Surprised? Or do you not know what I am referring to? Start doing some serious homework, man! But I concur with you that he is otherwise a true bhakta, and has a nice personality to go with, unlike you of course. The thing that I like the most about Mahanidhi Maharaja is his laudably non-sectarian outlook on Krsna consciousness, and the friendly relations he strives to maintain with the non-Iskcon Vrajavasis, especially since he lives in Vrndavana most of the time. He even on occasion goes to pay his respects to Pandita Sri Ananta dasa Babaji Maharaja, the current occupier of the gaddi of the Gaudiya prayojana-acarya, Srila Raghunatha dasa Gosvamipada. Or do you ignore even this? Suggested reading for you - Vraja Journal.

 

I could, however, give you a significantly longer list than the one above, of guru-bhogis and pretenders who are committed ISKCONites. I have no inclination to write their names here but I am sure you know at least some of the people I have in mind, given that you are yourself an armchair Yankee GBC critic who has obviously never set foot in Deva-bhumi Bharata-varsa. In any case, I am a grhasti (you may choose to call me a grhamedhi like you have before, but I suppose that you are aware of what I think of infantile schmucks who resort to ad hominem attacks at every turn). Is being a householder a bad thing? HDG Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada himself sanctified many dozens of marriages between his disciples, both Indian and Western. Maybe he was wrong, if we go by your gormless reasoning. He should just have told everybody to remain celibates forever, and that would have been it!

 

And lastly, for your information, I was a congregational member of ISKCON for over 10 years before these guys put me off irreversibly due to the standard discriminating mentality and mercantile, even mercenary, approach to preaching that most of them adhere to. So what you said in response to my earlier piece is complete poppycock, in short. The post of mine which got you riled up so much that you wasted almost an entire post of yours criticising me personally, rather than trying to defeat my arguments, was and remains my basic take on contemporary Vaisnava association. I should also point out that you conveniently sidestepped the last sentence in which I said to Miraji that for those who get what they need from ISKCON, that is perfectly okay.

 

In the end, I cannot judge you too harshly. You draw practically everything you know about Lord Caitanya's mission from ISKCON, unlike my own infinitely more eclectic proclivity. I am not so ignorant and closed-minded as to think that God only reveals Himself to a select few individuals belonging to a 40-year-old organisation, when nearly two billion years have elapsed in the present kalpa according to orthodox Vedic chronology, and Mahaprabhu Himself appeared over 500 years ago. See my sense of perspective? And concerning propagating Gaudiya Vaisnavism, well over 50% of Hare Krsna activities outside of India are now authored by the various Gaudiya Mathas and traditional Parivara lines. You don't trust what I say, eh? Just carry out some research of your own, and you WILL see that this can be statistically confirmed. I abstain from making statements that cannot be backed by evidence, Guruvani. As a London-educated qualified finance professional, that kind of academic rigor and honesty is embedded in me. But I guess it is really too much asking to demand a comparable level of intellectualism of you.

 

Know that this is VERILY the last time I am taking the time to reply to you on any subject matter whatsoever. You can insult me behind my back, call my credentials into question, and engage in all types of reprehensible behaviour; I shall simply not bother to as much as read anything that you type henceforth. Go about wasting your time and energy, it will be nothing more than water on a duck's back as far as I am concerned.

 

Ganga-maiya Ki Jaya

 

Jaya Radhe

[Guruvani 0]

 

who get what they need from ISKCON, that is perfectly okay.

 

In the end, I cannot judge you too harshly. You draw practically everything you know about Lord Caitanya's mission from ISKCON, unlike my own infinitely more eclectic proclivity.

 

Well Vikramji, maybe you need to polish your crystal ball a little.

Your attempt at evaluating my own orientation and experience is a little off the mark.

Actually, I had probably come and gone from ISKCON before you even knew what ISKCON was.

I joined ISKCON in 1975 and before Srila Prabhupada had left I had recieved both Harinama and diksha.

I left ISKCON in 1981 to join with Dhira Krishna Maharaja to start the first temple of Srila Sridhar Maharaja in the western world.

I was the pujari and the cook.

I was known in some ISKCON temples as a good cook and kitchen manager.

 

So, I was amongst the very first ISKCON devotees to leave ISKCON and get involved with "Gaudiya Math" (SCSM).

Even before that I was reading some Gaudiya Matha pulications like Jaiva Dharma, Brhat Bhagavatamritam and others.

 

Before I became a Hare Krishna devotee I was into hatha-yoga and meditation and I read many books on yoga and Eastern Philosophy by Yogananda (Autobiography of a Yogi, which is the book that brought me into Eastern religion and philosophy), Swami Vishnudevananda, Maharishi, Swami Satchidananda, Theos Bernard, Christopher Isherwood and about every other Yogi or Eastern philosopher of that was popular in the Early 70's.

 

I have most all the books every published by Sridhar Maharaja and some of the books by Govinda Maharaja.

 

I was even into Harish Johari and I especially like his book "Dhanvantari".

 

I was already a vegetarian and yogi before I ever heard of Hare Krishna.

 

Basically, I been a follower of Eastern religion for about 35 yeas now and I am now 54 years old.

So, I started my journey as a young man in the US Navy.

 

 

 

My experience and research has taken well beyond the limits of ISKCON.

I even dabbled in the forums of Madhavananda and Jagadanananda an have had plenty of experience in hearing about their "traditional" parivar etc. etc.

 

I have also read quite a bit of Narayana Maharaja which has always been nice but with enough sand in the sweet rice that I couldn't take it.

 

Right now on my desk I have a Gaudiya Matha version of Jaiva Dharma that was published under the auspices of B.V Tirtha Maharaja and translated by the combined efforts of Professor Haridas Maitra and then Bhakti Sadhaka Nishkinchana Maharaja and finally finished by Yati Maharaja.

 

So, I was an ISKCON deviant before you even knew what ISKCON was.

 

My studies and my knowledge extend far beyond ISKCON.

 

I just happen to feel some tendency to try and defend the mission and the movement of Srila Prabhupada as I think it is important for the spiritual welfare of all the people of the western worlds.

 

I have my own views about what is the best way to continue the mission of Srila Prabhupada and I have my own views on what was the thinking of Sridhar Maharaja when he appointed Govinda Maharaja as a ritvik.

 

I have never really left my foundation in Krishna consciousness which is the books of Srila Prabhupada and I have really never yet found any books as nectarine and juicy as the books of Srila Prabhupada, so that is why I sometimes appear as an ISKCON man because I saw ISKCON in it's glory days and I remember well how wonderful and marvelous ISKCON was and still could be today if things were just done properly.

 

I left ISKCON well over 20 years ago.

 

But, I have never written off Srila Prabhupada and how important his mission was and I have never accepted that ISKCON had to become a disgrace and a disaster had the leadership of ISKCON actually conducted the society the right way.

 

As far other groups, they all have their own failures and dirty little secrets and this idea that there is some pristine and pure "traditional" parivar out there that is superior to ISKCON is also a fraud and a hoax and based upon nothing but deception.

[Beggar 0]

 

As far other groups, they all have their own failures and dirty little secrets and this idea that there is some pristine and pure "traditional" parivar out there that is superior to ISKCON is also a fraud and a hoax and based upon nothing but deception.

Nice post, then BOOM!!!, the shock jock of the Gaudiya internet makes an outrageous statement. The purity of a line of pure devotees has nothing to do with the bad behavior of neophytes on the extreme outer limits of bhakti. To think as such means that one is a resident of the Twilight Zone!

[Guest guest]

I would be reluctant to take advice from a person who despite practicing bhakti-yoga for several decades still acts like a fanatical neophyte.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Nice post, then BOOM!!!, the shock jock of the Gaudiya internet makes an outrageous statement. The purity of a line of pure devotees has nothing to do with the bad behavior of neophytes on the extreme outer limits of bhakti. To think as such means that one is a resident of the Twilight Zone!

 

Well, hey, I guess I am a shock jock of the forums.

I guess that makes up for the fact that my daily life if just so much boredom, routine and mundane affairs of making money to pay bills and keep up with a small slice of Florida jungle.

 

In reality, I am the least fanatic of all you people.

I never wear Hare Krishna clothes, shave my head or put mud on my forehead.

 

I am just mundane person that is amazed at how shallow and superficial so many "Hare Krishnas" can be.

 

However, in response to your comment, I would like to respond that neither does the bad behaviour if ISKCON gurus and GBC men or fools on the fringe like me, reflect at all on how deep, how pure and how significant are the teachings and the mission of Srila Prabhupada.

 

I don't consider the teachings of Srila Prabhupada to be any less or any lower than what "traditional parivars" are promoting, especially the leaders of the siddha-pranali cult that are playing with something that is way beyond their possibilities considering that none of them are as renounced and austere as a any true siddha would have to be.

 

Srila Prabhupada taught a practical ideology.

 

He didn't promote some artificial form of sadhana that made sahajiyas out of devotees by tempting them with false and artifical promises and delusions of grandeur.

 

What is "pure and pristine" to one person is cheap and imitative to another.

 

Personally, I don't know of any contemporary acharya as inspired and empowed as Srila Prabhupada or any system of Bhakti more useful and effective than the Yoga System promulgated by Srila Prabhupada.

 

Srila Prabhupada was siddha bhakta.

 

I think that is well established in his writings and teachings.

 

Siddhas like Srila Prabhupada are not dime-a-dozen.

 

Being and old Gaudiya sannyasi doesn't make one a siddha.

 

I prefer to get my information from the siddha.

 

If someone else wants to put all their faith in a sadhaka, then that is their choice.

 

I will continue to study the teachings of the siddha.

[Laulyam 0]

<CENTER>The Art of Sadhana

 

</CENTER><CENTER>by His Divine Grace Srila Bhakti Pramode Puri Maharaja

 

</CENTER><CENTER>Epilogue

 

</CENTER>

saiveyam bhuvi dhanya-gauda-nagari velapi saivambudheh

so yam sri-purusottamo madhu-pates tany eva namani ca

no kutrapi niriksyate hari hari premotsavas tadrha caitanya krpa-nidhana tava kim viksye punar vaibavam

 

 

"This is the same city of Gauda, blessed on earth,

 

this too the very same ocean beach,

 

this, the town of Purusottama (Puri)

 

and these, the very same Holy Names, Hare Krsna;

 

but alas! Nowhere can I see the same festival of love. Oh, caitanya, source of all compassion,

 

Will I ever again see Your glories?"

 

(Prabodhananda Sarasvati's Chaitanya-candramrta,140)

 

gorara ami mukhe balile na cale

gorara acara gorara pracara laile phala phale

 

 

"It is not enough to simply advertise repeatedly that one is a devotee of Mahaprabhu saying, 'I am Gaura's, I am Gaura's.' The result of being the Lord's Follower come to one who takes up Mahaprabhu's preaching mission as well as the practices taught by Him."

 

(Prema-vivarta)

Some of us affirm, with conviction, that we follow Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, have faith In Him, and are devoted to Him. When we interact with Vaishnavas from other traditions that do not have the same regard for Mahaprabhu that we do, we strongly rebuke them; And criticize them in articles and speeches.

There is indeed a general notion among ordinary people today that Mahaprabhu is accepted throughout the world and that no one truly rejects Him. However, if we look deeply we find that very few of us truly follow Mahaprabhu. In fact, fearing to be called atheists for not offering respect to the Vedic scriptures and the Supreme Lord or of being vilified by the public in general, we claim to honor Mahaprabhu, but all we are really interested in is our own prestige.

There is, these days, a class of people who, leading a reckless private life and following The partial discipline of the smartas, act permissively and whimsically and still dare to Publicly criticize the true followers of Mahaprabhu. Dismissing Mahaprabhu's teachings as sectarian, they neglect the standards of Vaishnava conduct and yet profess to know the Lord better than His devotees do. Thus they criticize in their publications the great personalities who have dedicated their lives to Mahaprabhu's service, making Him the ultimate goal of their lives.

However, the honest inquirer finds that these people are affected by the disease of self deception, of weakness of character, of dishonesty. The arrogance of these people has nothing to do with true acceptance of Mahaprabhu and His message, but is only proof of sickening attachment to personal prestige and sense gratification.

If we ask ourselves, "Are we truly following Mahaprabhu?" and then honestly seek the answer, we must first examine not only Mahaprabhu's own teachings and conduct, but those of His personal associates, through whom the Lord spread His message. We must then ask ourselves how closely we follow those teachings, especially in times of personal difficulty or social disapproval.

Sadly, some people accept as Mahaprabhu's teachings only those portions that are convenient to their life styles or frame of mind. Such people believe that Sri Rupa, Sri Sanatana, Sri Jiva, Krishnadasa Kaviraja Goswami,Vrindavan dasa Thakura and other intimate associates of the Lord profess doctrines that in reality are different from Mahaprabhu's. They even go as far as to claim that Mahaprabhu's followers are narrow-minded sectarians who have made many exaggerated claims about the Lord's person and teachings. Thus they refuse to accept the statements of Mahaprabhu's associates as authoritative. But when genuine teachers of the doctrines of Vaishnavas expose these people's mock following of Mahaprabhu, showing that, for all intents and purposes, it is actually opposition to the Lord, they become angry and verbally attack the devotees.

The foolish attitude of these people is comparable to the logic of half a hen-Mahaprabhu cannot be separated from His entourage. One cannot cut off the Lord's hands and feet and then pay respects to His head. When devotees quote the voices of authority from the disciplic succession, these self-styled followers of Mahaprabhu call it the Vaishnava sect's fanaticism and narrow-mindedness. As an example they quote the Caitanya Bhagavat verse in which Vrinavan dasa Thakura condemns Nityananda Prabhu's critics:

 

eta parihareo je papi ninda kare

tabe lathi maron tara sierra upare

 

 

"I will take a stick and beat on the head those sinners who, ignoring everything

 

I have said, continue to blaspheme Nityananda Prabhu"

 

(Chaitanya Bhagavata 1.9.225; 17.158; 2.11.63; 2.18.223;2.23.522)

The self-styled followers of Mahaprabhu call these utterances of Vrindavan Dasa Thakura violent and intemperate, and proof of the fanaticism of Vaishnavas in general.

Their imaginary approval of Mahaprabhu is based on a rejection of the Lord's associates which is deep rooted in malice and malevolence. They, convinced that devotion is nothing but sentimentalism and unfounded enthusiasm, consider Mahaprabhu's devotees incapable of understanding the Lord's true nature. But they believe themselves, as independent third parties, capable of such understanding. The extant of the arrogance manifest in such a claim is completely beyond even their own comprehension. Such is the type of person that prominently propagates its ideas today on the editorial pages of newspapers and from podiums of various public assemblies.

Other illegitimate modern-day followers of Mahaprabhu also are those who make a show of accepting Mahaprabhu and His associates, but actually profess all manners of heterdox views. Like wolves in sheep's clothing, these pseudo-Vaishnavas pose as orthodox thinkers, making a hypocritical display of devotion while actually being infected by caste consciousness, monism, or the so-called philosophy of synthesis (samanvaya-vada). These characters make a show of accepting Mahaprabhu and His close associates, but protest either openly or anonymously when Mahaprabhu's surrendered devotees fearlessly preach the Lord's message as it is.

These duplicitous frauds tolerate the brow-beating of the impersonalist or the caste Brahmins, but when a bonafide acarya speaks out they are unable to tolerate it. Due to excessive sentimentalism and lust, these sahajiyas have become so inflated in their egotism that when told that Mahaprabhu's teaching and example direct one to give up bad association, they object, unwilling to give up their sensuous ways.

In the Chaitanya Charitamrta, the story of Chota Haridasa is told as a lesson for potentially deviant followers. Certain aspects of Chota Haridasa's conduct were displeasing to Mahaprabhu and are to be avoided.

When Krishnadasa Vipra was tempted away from Mahaprabhu's association by the Bhattathari woman, he was not acting as a branch of the Chaitanya desire tree of divine Love. Giving up the direct service of the Lord to consort with these woman, he was not keeping with what is expected of an eternal associate of the Lord.

When in Vraja, the Lord's companion, Balabhadra Bhattacarya, wanted to leave the service of Mahaprabhu-Krishna Himself- to see the supposed reincarnation of Krishna in Kaliya lake,his behavior was not in accordance with the true standard of an eternal companion of the Lord.

Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya supported the smarta and Mayavada philosophies and even refused to accept Mahaprabhu as an incarnation of Lord Krishna. His is another example of conduct uncharacteristic of the branches of the Chaitanya tree of divine love. Many such examples are found throughout the accounts of Lord Chaitanya's lila. There is the instance of Jagai and Madhai's sinful existence and their violent behavior towards Nityananada Prabhu and Haridasa Thakura, and their opposition to the chanting of the Holy Name. There is Gopinatha Pattanayaka, who stole from the royal treasury. Kamalakanta Visvasa, Advaita Prabhu's disciple, perceived Advaita to be in dept. Brahmananda Bharati, one of the roots of the desire tree of divine love, wore a deer skin,the dress of a Mayavadi sannyasi; and Mahaprabhu did not approve of this and corrected him. Vallabhacarya, who is identified in the Gaura-ganoddesa-dipika as an incarnation of Sukadeva, proclaimed his own commentary on the Bhagavatam to be superior to that of Sridhara Svami- this kind of arrogance is not characteristic of a Sukadeva.

Devananda pundit, also counted among the branches of the Chaitanya tree, tolerated offenses to Mahaprabhu's dear associate, Srivasa Pundit, he contemplated liberation; and interpreted the Srimad Bhagavatam in ways that opposed its true purport of devotion to Krishna. This is certainly not befitting an eternal companion to the lord.

Sentimentalist prakrta-sahajiyas find it painful to hear such criticism of conduct that was disapproved by Mahaprabhu himself, But just as a good doctor does not hide his diagnosis in order to please the patient, the devotees of the lord do not hide from the fact that progress in spiritual life is dependant on giving up attachment to bad company, sense gratification, and immediate pleasures. The devotee does not withhold good advice out of a desire to deceive and flatter. If the straightforward, direct and honest devotee says that engaging in illicit sexual activity is determined to spiritual life and advises one to give it up; or if he tells someone overly attached to wife and children to give up that attachment, these are beneficial instructions. When spoken, the truth may cause pain, but the devotee would rather speak the truth out of kindness than add more fuel on the fire of people's material attachments.

We may be very vocal about following Mahaprabhu, but when he declares that the essence of Vaishnava conduct is to give up bad association such as the company of womanizers and non-devotees, shall we call him cruel and unkind? Mahaprabhu called Chota Haridasa a "monkey renunciate," one who has given up the appearance of interest in sensual life but goes on to flirt with woman and do other things contrary to the vaishnava rules of conduct. Mahaprabhu said about Chota Haridasa that the only atonement for this grievous deviation was to drown himself. Shall we then call Mahaprabhu cruel and unkind? Shall we deny that he ever said such a thing? Shall we rather try to establish that Mahaprabhu approves of our own loose standards of worldly behavior? If we go about giving speeches in public assemblies to this end, is it not simply proof of our own dishonesty?

We may say, "I accept and follow Mahaprabhu," but despite point-by-point evidence in Mahaprabhu's teachings, we do not accept that the only way of attaining God is devotion characterized by chanting the Holy names. Nor do we accept that karma, jnana and yoga are indirect and troublesome paths full of hornets, ghost, and poisonous snakes. Mahaprabhu and His followers sometimes called other spiritual paths " poison chalices," or " worse than hell," but we insist that these statements are not to be taken literally and that Mahaprabhu was making exaggerated claims in order to promote His doctrine. Is this accepting Mahaprabhu as He is? We want to fit Mahaprabhu's doctrines into the mold of our own subjectivity. Are we then not giving more weight to our own fancies or to current public opinion than to Mahaprabhu? When we put bhakti on the same platform with jnana or karma, are we not in effect rejecting bhakti?

Mahaprabhu used the word satitva, or wifely chastity, to describe the attitude of a devotee who does not mix his devotional service with jnana or karma, or obscure his devotion with desires for sense enjoyment or gratification, all of which He compares to marital infidelity. When we say that bhakti is just one of many different ways of attaining the Supreme, we are saying, in effect, that a wife who cheats on her husband and one who is chaste and faithful are equal. No doubt those sects that promote illicit sexual activities will be glad to hear such tidings, for this liberal attitude gives their transgressions legitimacy. But normally, a respectable person objects to the idea that his chaste mother is on the same level as a prostitute. Of course, a wicked individual or a prostitute has no problem with a righteous man or a chaste woman being derided in this manner! They simply think, "Welcome to the club!"

Privately and publicly, the world has introduced infidelity as part of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu's pure doctrines. Thus quite naturally, many misled persons try to put their infidelity on the same level as the behavior of the chaste pure devotees of the Lord. This they call "the doctrine of synthesis." Like an infectious disease, this philosophy has spread from a few individuals to the society at large. Is it any surprise that Mayavada is rapidly proliferating in the world? So this is how we "honor" Mahaprabhu. We call our opposition to Mahaprabhu's doctrines " honoring" Him in order to keep up our public image.

Some of us actually believe that by making a public show of accepting Mahaprabhu we are doing Him a service rather than ourselves one: " I am a brahmin and I honor Mahaprabhu. I have studied so much and I accept Mahaprabhu. I have a big, important job and I follow Mahaprabhu. I am a rich man and I accept Mahaprabhu. So Mahaprabhu is beholden to me."

Others say that they will boycott Mahaprabhu if He opposes their imaginary concept of what is true religion, truth, service, or welfare work, even if his devotees can show from scripture that Mahaprabhu's position is orthodox. How can anyone claim this so-called acceptance of Mahaprabhu as authentic? Aren't we rather accepting our own whims and preferences as our authority? The teachings of Mahaprabhu cannot be changed to suit our own whimsical ideas.

In the Chaitanya Charitamrta Mahaprabhu says:

 

harer nama harer nama

harer namaiva kevalam

kalau nasty eva nasty eva

nasty eva gatir anyatha

 

 

"In this age of quarrel and hypocrisy the only means of deliverance is the chanting of the holy names of the Lord. There is no other way; there is no other way; there is no other way."

 

( Brhan-naradiya Purana, Chaitanya Charitamrta 1.7.76)

<CENTER>Smartas and Pancopaskas

 

</CENTER>In another verse of Chaitanya Charitamrta Mahaprabhu says:

ekale isvara krsna ara saba bhrtya

jara jaiche nacaya se taiche kare nrtya

 

 

"Lord Krishna alone is the supreme controller, all others are his servants. As He makes people dance, so do they dance."

 

(Chaitanya Charitamrta 1.5.142)

And Mahaprabhu adds: "The goddesses Ganga and Durga are My servants. Shiva is My Servant." This is stated in the most authoritative text, the Brahma-samhita:

 

Srsti-sthiti-pralaya-sadhana-saktir eka

chayeva yasya bhuvanani bibharti durga

icchanurupam api yasya ca cestate sa

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

 

 

"The external potency of Maya, who is of the nature of the shadow of the cit potency, is worshipped by all people as Durga, the creating, preserving and destroying agency of thes mundane world. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda in accordance with whose will Durga conducts herself."

 

(Brahma-samhita 5.44)

 

ksiram yatha dadhi vikara-visesa-yogat

sanjayate na he tatah prthag asti hetoh

yah sambhutam api tatha samupaiti karyad

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

 

 

"Just as, by the action of acids, milk is transformed into curd but yet the effect of curd is neither the same as, nor different from its cause, viz., milk, so I adore the primeval Lord Govinda of whom the state of Sambhu (Shiva) is a transformation for the performance of the work of destruction."

 

(Brahma-samhita 5.45)

 

yat-pada-pallava-yugam vinidhaya kumbha-

dvandva pranama-samaye sa ganadhirajah

vighnan vihantum alam asya jagat-trayasya

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

 

 

"I adore the primeval Lord Govinda, whose lotus feet are always held by Ganesh upon the tusks of his elephant head in order to obtain power for his function- destroying obstacles on the path of progress of the three worlds."

 

(Brahma-samita 5.50)

 

yac-caksur esa savita sakala-grahanam

raja samasta-sura-murtir asesa-tejah

yasyajnaya bhramati sambrta-kala-cakro

govindam adi-purusam tam aham bhajami

 

 

"The sun, king of all planets, full of infinite effulgence, the image of the good soul, is the eye of this world. I adore the primeval Lord Govinda in pursuance of whose order the sum performs his journey mounting the wheel of time."

 

(Brahma Samhita 5.52)

In all these verses we find endorsement of Mahaprabhu's rejection of the smarta doctrine of the Pancopasakas, or worship of the five deities-Shiva, Durga, Ganesh, Surya, and Vishnu. But sespite the clear evidence from Brahma-samita quoted in Mahaprabhu's teachings, Pancopasakas cling to their doctrine, arguing that the Vedas themselves authorize this process of polytheistic worship. They affirm that Mahaprabhu Himself visited the temples and holy places connected to these deities, prayed to them and danced before them. They further argue that if Mahaprabhu did not accept a type of worship that is authorized in the Vedas, then the Vaisnava religion must be considered out of line with the Vedic literature. Indeed, some foolish deviants desclare that Mahaprabhu's religion in not Vedic.

Influenced by public opinion, we toss all these gheterodox ideas about in our heads. There are indeed many manes of gods in the Vedic literature, but only Vishnu is referred to as the supreme diety above all others, and independent of them. The most ancient of the Vedas, the Rgveda-samhita, clearly states that Vishnu is superior to all gods.

 

Agnir vai devanam adhamah

Visnuh paramah

Tad-antara hy anya-devatah

 

 

"Agni is the least of the gods; Vishnu is supreme. All other gods are somewhere in between these two."

The Bhagavad-gita and other Vedic scriptures clearly state that the worship of any god other than the Supreme Lord in incorrect and goes against the Vedic principles. Gaurasundar may have visited numerous temples dedicated to gods and goddesses, and shown them respect, but He never considered them to be independent or supreme. Rather, He considered all the gods and goddesses to be servants of Vishnu, and therefore devotees, or Vaisnavas. In this sense only He considerd them worshippable. Otherwise, according to the Pancopasana understanding, the five gods are worshipped purely functionally and within the temporal world. The goal of the Pancopasana is to go beyond these deites' various forms and merge into the impersonal Brahman. At the end of the puja, the five deity forms are ultimately abandoned in the visarjana ceremony. Mahaprabhu accepted that Vishnu and the Vaisnavas have transcendental forms of eternity, bliss, and knowledge. Shiva, Durga, Ganesh, and Surya worshiped by Mahaprahu are the order carriers of the Supreme Lord Vishnu in His abode of Goloka-Vaikunth. There these deities are His eternal associates, and thus never purely functional and to ever be discarded. Who then are the true followers of the Veda, the Vaisnavas or the Mayavadis or the Mayavadis and Pancopasakas who simply consider these forms imaginary and as convienevt objects of worship to ultimately by discarded? Who showed greater respect of Shiva, Ravana, or the Pracetas? Therefore the question: Are we truly following Mahaprabhu? Or are we following Him according to our own convenience, our own tastes and imagination?

[Guest guest]

There might be a possibility for some nice non-ISKCON association with Swami Tripurari and his spiritual family soon in Costa Rica. A disciple describes:

 

"Now almost three weeks ago, I was standing in the kitchen talking to Vrindaranya about Swami’s thoughts on Costa Rice when Swami came in. I relayed some information I found on the internet when he pointed at me and said: “do you have three hundred dollars for a ticket to Costa Rica?” I was stunned by the question and said yes. “Good, you, Vrindaranya and I are going to Costa Rica.” A week later our tickets were booked and our bags packed. Who said monastic life isn’t dynamic?"

 

see the blog of tim van der weide for more details!

[Guruvani 0]

 

There might be a possibility for some nice non-ISKCON association with Swami Tripurari and his spiritual family soon in Costa Rica. A disciple describes:

 

"Now almost three weeks ago, I was standing in the kitchen talking to Vrindaranya about Swami’s thoughts on Costa Rice when Swami came in. I relayed some information I found on the internet when he pointed at me and said: “do you have three hundred dollars for a ticket to Costa Rica?” I was stunned by the question and said yes. “Good, you, Vrindaranya and I are going to Costa Rica.” A week later our tickets were booked and our bags packed. Who said monastic life isn’t dynamic?"

 

see the blog of tim van der weide for more details!

wow, I might have to put a straw in my teeth and beg T Swami for forgiveness and see if I can join him in Costa Rica.

 

I still have several years to devote to my kids, but I have been thinking about retiring in Costa Rica for some time now.

 

I hope T Swami gets something going there.

 

When my kids are all grown and on their own I am going to cash in my real estate and retire in Costa Rica.

 

I hope he is settling on the Caribbean side.

 

the waves on the Pacific side are too big.....

[Guest guest]

 

 

When my kids are all grown and on their own I am going to cash in my real estate and retire in Costa Rica.

 

 

When your kids are gone you need to travel and preach. You know so much. You have a big debt to repay. The only way you can repay it is to give Krsna Consciousness to the innocent, no matter what color is your cloth and no matter what camp you are aligned or not aligned with.

[Guruvani 0]

 

When your kids are gone you need to travel and preach. You know so much. You have a big debt to repay. The only way you can repay it is to give Krsna Consciousness to the innocent, no matter what color is your cloth and no matter what camp you are aligned or not aligned with.

 

well, thats a nice thought.

but really, I am not much of a preacher.

I like to write, but I shy away from public exposure.

 

there are so many preachers already.

 

I would prefer to be an ascetic committed to bhajan.

 

There are so many better preachers than me.

I am very reclusive.

 

I have been a loner all my life.

 

I don't think that is going to change as I get older.

 

I don't really have any friends.

I just like solitary living, but I do have my kids.

 

Still, they have their own lives and their own friends.

Me, I am just a loner.

 

More by destiny than by choice.

 

People that do know me like me a lot.

But, I don't get involved.

 

It's actually kind of sad to be a loner.

 

But, that is my fate I guess.

[stonehearted 0]

 

I hope he is settling on the Caribbean side.

 

the waves on the Pacific side are too big.....

 

Pacific side.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Pacific side.

I should have guessed he wouldn't want to settle on the Caribbean side with all them Rastafarians and hippies around there smokin' the kine.

 

Pacific side is where most of the big tourist resorts are.

 

Most all the hippie types that go down to Costa Rica like the Caribbean side.

Pacific side is more touristy and built up with big resorts.

 

But, they get less rain on the Pacific side and lots and lots of rain on the Caribbean side.

So, that is one point for the Pacific side.

As matter of fact, that one fact alone might make the Pacific side preferable to the rainy, rainy Caribbean side.

 

On one side the waves are too big and on the other side the waves are too small for the average beach tourist looking to get on the body board and catch a few waves.

But, the west coast is popular with the more experienced surfers looking for some big waves.

 

Costa Rica.......lush, tropical and inviting.

 

My daughter is going on a cruise to the Caribbean this week with the girl scouts.......Bahamas, Cancun etc.

 

I usually just head over to Crescent Beach when I want some Sun 'n Sand.

Waves are just right for the body board surfing.

Not much in Florida for the big boards.

Florida is body board heaven.

[mahak 0]

We knew one who went there way back, knew how to burn cane from hawaii,, and got govt backing to do such business in Costa Rica as well. Heard from him years later, married into real wealth. Nice person, way cool devotee, master builder of temples. Remember gary, babhru (he had so many names, gary was his kauai name during the t-shirt campaign)? Evah heah mo?

 

For a dying surfer, mauritius. Nice waves, good devotee association possible. Head hunters only in same places they hide in berkeley.

 

aloha pumehana ( i still do pidgin, never caught on to squillaquamish). White washingtom boys all look alike.

 

mahaksadasa, croaking like a frog, hiding from cobras.

[mahak 0]

hey, i like ya, gv, you di kine. You praise jah an you feah no mon. haribol, yo bro, mahak