Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
CCC

Can a Siksa Guru empower you for making disciples?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

A devote said me that His Guru (Disciple of Srila Prabhupada) went to Sridhar Maharaj and He said Him that he should make disciples.

 

As far as I know The Diksa Guru entrust his disciple to be a Guru, Srila Prabhupada was ordered by His Spiritual Master to be a Guru, but can a Siksa Guru take the position of the Diksa and say to his godbrother's disciple be guru and make disciples?

 

 

Thanks!

 

Hare Krsna!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Srinivasa Acharya Prabhu was in Vrindaban he took diksa (mantra initiation) from Sri Gopala Bhatta Goswami. He also accepted Sri Jiva Goswami as his siksa Guru. At that time the writings of the six Goswamis were unknown in Bengal and Sri Jiva Goswami instructed Srinivas Acharya, along with his friends Srila Narottama das Thakura Mahasaya and Sri Syamananda Thakura, to go to Bengal and Orissa and distribute the divine knowledge taught by the six Goswamis.

 

Sri Jiva empowered Srinivasa Acharya. Srinivasa Acharya was the more senior of the three friends because he was born of a brahmin family. The others were also empowered by Sri Jiva, most specially Syamananda Thakura who received diksa from Hridayananda Goswami but who received detailed siksa from Sri Jiva. Anyway, Srinivasa Acharya in particular was told to preach, to make disciples, to give diksa, everything, by Sri Jiva Goswami, who was his siksa guru.

 

It is to be noted, however, that the empowerment one may receive from a genuine Guru is conditional. If the person who has been empowered later deviates from what Mahaprabhu taught and becomes a sinner then the empowerment can be withdrawn. Mahaprabhu taught: "O my lord, I don't want followers, wealth or women, I only want devotion - Sri Siksastakam". It is a matter of historical fact that Srila Sridhar Maharaj later rejected several people who he conditionally accepted as Gurus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If the person who has been empowered later deviates from what Mahaprabhu taught and becomes a sinner then the empowerment can be withdrawn.

Thing is we do not need to speculate. Rather we need to see things from the eyes of scripture, shastra chaksusa. And in the scriptures we find "gurusuh narah matih narakah sah" -- anyone who claims that Krishna's parampara gurus are subject to material influences like any ordinary men, is a resident of hell. But meanwhile even deviants with records are kept in office and we're told wait and see, tolerate, cooperate and work with.

Gurus are like an ordinary man? May be in other so called religions, but not in genuine Vaishnavism. Or as Krishna-kirti prabhu, editor of the Hare Krishna Journal, puts it, do Lord Sri Krishna's pure parampara gurus urgently need a reform?

 

"From my viewpoint I think that gradually the movement is going to be split up though. Not due to this, but rather because of the seperatist gurus in our movement. It is a fact that not many of them can coexist in harmony with one another and so they are gradually splintering off and forming their own temples or becoming the center of some. . . . . Not to say that anyone's intention is bad in this regard, but it is an undeniable fact that it is taking place. I believe this is the rebellion against the guru reform movement. I call it the de facto zonal guru. I believe the impact of the constitution will have little effect . . . because devotees will put more emphasis on the words of their local acharya than the GBC. (HG Krishna-kirti das 3 Feb. 2008)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siksas and diksas were plentiful at Naimasaranya. Including Vyasa, Narada, Parasara. They could not in one eyelash give any empowerment to Romaraharsana, who was slain by a blade of grass by the only one who gives empowerment to be His external manifestation as guru, all types, introductory, teacher, or initiator, Lord Sri Balarama.

 

This has been a grave misunderstanding over many decades, where is empowerment to represent Krsna springing from. There is no history where a guru makes the next guru, despite many claims to the contrary. There is no history of any being other than Lord Balarama empowering any guru in any way. And there is no dialogue if such empowerment does not even fit into convention or ritual program, either.

 

So how can one tell if guru is empowered if not by another so-called enlightened one that we can ask if such is authentic? Well, Lord Balarama is at both ends of the guru tattwa phenomenon, inspiring guru to accept disciple and guiding disciple to accepting genuine guru.

 

If one needs to get god thru dog, there is no bhakti or any kind of other yoga possible.

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to first understand what is siksa guru and what we mean by empowerment. Everyone here or who instructs another to seek God is a siksa guru. Dhruva and Suniti give this example.

 

We become empowered up to the level of the correct instruction we follow and assimilate into our consciousness.

 

A siksa guru who is a cent per cent devotee of Krsna can pierce all material coverings and awaken the soul by his sound vibration. At this level said Guru is actually the voice of Caitya-guru, Balarama or Nityananda as Mahaksa pointed out.

 

Many siksa gurus and ecclesiastical gurus of various types and levels of purity but only the transcendentally situated devotee can give this real diksa or rebirth through his sound vibration.

 

Prabhupada as Siksa Guru is still among us despite the efforts of some to muffle his voice through various schemes like rewriting his purports etc.

 

So there are siksa gurus and Siksa guru. We must be careful who we hear from.

 

Krsna please guide us.:pray:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gurun is plural in number because anyone who gives spiritual instructions based on the revealed scriptures is accepted as a spiritual master. Although others give help in showing the way to beginners, the guru who first initiates one with the maha-mantra is to be known as the initiator, and the saints who give instructions for progressive advancement in Krsna consciousness are called instructing spiritual masters. The initiating and instructing spiritual masters are equal and identical manifestations of Krsna, although they have different dealings.

 

(From Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, Adi 1.34, purport)

 

It is Krishna who inspires and empowers devotees to preach, whatever outward form it may take, through the spiritual masters. krsna sakti vine nahi tara pravartana . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's line is a siksa line.....

 

yes, and in our line siksa gurus often are more important than diksa gurus.

 

As to the earlier statement:

 

"Srila Prabhupada was ordered by His Spiritual Master to be a Guru"

 

one needs to remember that this order could have only came from within. There is no external record of BST ordering SP to become a guru. Any disciple can say: "I had a dream where my guru ordered me to start accepting disciples" - there is no way to verify such claims.

 

More importantly, all sincere followers of Lord Caitanya were ordered by Him to become gurus. If a devotee is able to inspire many people to take up Krsna consciousness he is CERTAINLY authorized to be a guru by Lord Caitanya. We judge by the results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We judge by the results.

 

 

Exactly. But on what basis do we make such a judgment. For instance a charismatic person can attract thousands of followers, even Hitler did that. Thousands may even be chanting under his inspiration and that's all good, but perhaps none develop genuine love of God. Another may have only one or two students but in his association they rise to Krishna prema.

 

It's quality and not quantity. Anybody who can count can judge quantity. But it's a rare person who can separate genune diamonds from those man made and fewer still who can determine the finest of diamonds from amongst the real.

 

So accepting the principle of siksa guru as paramount one must then distinquish between the various siksa gurus in one's life looking for the one who is the most advanced.

 

By again how are we to judge? If we direct our faith to Caitya-guru first and solely in this matter and are sincere He will guide us true and protect us from being mislead.

 

There is NO viable alternative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Exactly. But on what basis do we make such a judgment. For instance a charismatic person can attract thousands of followers, even Hitler did that. Thousands may even be chanting under his inspiration and that's all good, but perhaps none develop genuine love of God. Another may have only one or two students but in his association they rise to Krishna prema.

 

What is wrong with having both of these options? Is one really better than other? It takes many, many "ordinary" devotees to spread Lord Caitanya's movement. Where would we be today if Prabhupada did not have so many "ordinary" disciples to do the gruntwork? I see some Iskcon gurus inspiring thousands of people to take up KC in a serious way - are they not obviously authorized as gurus by Lord Caitanya or Srila Prabhupada? I am not saying they are to be our next foundational sampradaya acharya, but as a guru they ARE producing results (i.e. people taking up chanting of the holy Name) and becoming devotees. Who is to say where and when the next bunch of pure devotees will come from? How many disciples of Prabhupada do you know that attained Krsna prema? And how can you tell?

 

So in practice it is the obvious results that let us figure out who was empowered to be a guru. That is even how Prabhupada's godbrothers became convinced he was empowered - by watching his big herd of "white elephants" he brought back with him to India.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is wrong with having both of these options? Is one really better than other? It takes many, many "ordinary" devotees to spread Lord Caitanya's movement. Where would we be today if Prabhupada did not have so many "ordinary" disciples to do the gruntwork? I see some Iskcon gurus inspiring thousands of people to take up KC in a serious way - are they not obviously authorized as gurus by Lord Caitanya or Srila Prabhupada? I am not saying they are to be our next foundational sampradaya acharya, but as a guru they ARE producing results (i.e. people taking up chanting of the holy Name) and becoming devotees. Who is to say where and when the next bunch of pure devotees will come from? How many disciples of Prabhupada do you know that attained Krsna prema? And how can you tell?

 

So in practice it is the obvious results that let us figure out who was empowered to be a guru. That is even how Prabhupada's godbrothers became convinced he was empowered - by watching his big herd of "white elephants" he brought back with him to India.

 

Wish this were true. Here we have a real huge propaganda machine going, the GM announcing, everything what Prabhupada set-up is destined to collapse. They actually believe all these desasters that happened in this part of the world can only happen when there's no link to the disciplic succession, things are cut off from the spiritual powerhouse so to speak. They actually say that the only explanation is that Prabhupada wasn't properly authorized. I find this quite offensive and these people going the wrong direction. When Prabhupada's movement spread like anything around the globe, Prabhupada needed so many experienced Vaishnavas to teach all the newcomers, in fact thousands of people urgently needed to learn so many things, cooking, Deity worship, mridanga, preaching, etc. etc. Nobody came, Prabhupada had to do everything alone. When Prabhupada left, suddenly they all came and said, Prabhupada is our siksa guru, we are Prabhupada's friends, etc. Now there're parts of the world were ISKCON clearly failed at running examplary Vaishnava communities and other GM branches gained predominance by picking up ex-ISKCONITES. But do they say, "Where would we be today if Prabhupada did not have so many "ordinary" disciples to do the gruntwork?" The opposite is true, Prabhupada is declared as not bona fide. Although it may be hard, Gaudiya-Vaishnavism should at least stick to one point, not shooting itself an own goal with useless politics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is wrong with having both of these options? Is one really better than other? It takes many, many "ordinary" devotees to spread Lord Caitanya's movement. Where would we be today if Prabhupada did not have so many "ordinary" disciples to do the gruntwork? I see some Iskcon gurus inspiring thousands of people to take up KC in a serious way - are they not obviously authorized as gurus by Lord Caitanya or Srila Prabhupada? I am not saying they are to be our next foundational sampradaya acharya, but as a guru they ARE producing results (i.e. people taking up chanting of the holy Name) and becoming devotees. Who is to say where and when the next bunch of pure devotees will come from? How many disciples of Prabhupada do you know that attained Krsna prema? And how can you tell?

Sorry I wasn't more clear so you could understand what I was saying. I'll try to rephrase.

 

There are imitation siksa gurus all around. (man made diamonds)

 

Then there are are real diamonds. (Not perfected but capable of attracting many to chant and engage.)

 

And then amongst real diamonds there are exceptional diamonds whose level of purity is unparrelled. (The liberated devotee)

 

So what exactly are you objecting to in my post?

 

 

So in practice it is the obvious results that let us figure out who was empowered to be a guru.

You said results. my response was:

 

Exactly. But on what basis do we make such a judgment.

Exactly means I agreed with you. Then I wanted to go further and discuss the nature of what results we should look for and how to see them.

 

You are a real trip Kulapavanna. You have done this for a couple of years now. Even when I agree with you you then disagree with my post that agrees with you. Are you a crazy fellow or something or do I just rub you the wrong way for some reason.

 

 

That is even how Prabhupada's godbrothers became convinced he was empowered - by watching his big herd of "white elephants" he brought back with him to India.

Who cares what his Godbrothers recognized or did not recognize? Not me. The fact that they had to what until a "herd" of white elephants showed up on their doorstep to see that he was a great devotee proves their spiritual vision was low class to begin with. They should have recognized his pure hearted attempt and helped out. Gargamuni Brahmananda Yamuna Dasi Jadurani dasi and others got the message before the herd was assembled and even helped assemble the herd. So who clued them in? Caitya-guru that's who. I prefer their vision over the godbrothers.

 

Judging a devotees spiritual potency by head count would lead one to conclude that Bhavanada was more spiritually potent then Gaura Kishore das Babaji. Ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The opposite is true, Prabhupada is declared as not bona fide.

I have a real good hunch that the above statement is just hearsay. Do you have any verifiable evidence such as quotes published on the internet to support your claim? I believe that if you did then you would have quoted it in your post. Since there are respected sadhus in charge of the maths you are attempting to libel, you may be risking Vaisnava aparadha. Do you really care? It sure doesn't seem like you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto that, Beggar. If any prominent leaders of any Gaudiya-Math have made such declarations, let's have some evidence. And they didn't suddenly "decide" that Srila Prabhupada is their siksa guru. One of them has become famous for claiming that, but there's some historical basis for it. Another wrote four pranam mantras for Srila Prabhupada, one of which glorifies Srila Prabhupada as the best among millions of gurus, and another of which declares that he was empowered, having taken his guru's order on his head, to spread the glories of the Hare Krishna mahamantra in the West, and also in the East. There are so many nonsense accusations going around that it makes many embarrassed to have any connection with ISKCON. Ugh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You are a real trip Kulapavanna. You have done this for a couple of years now. Even when I agree with you you then disagree with my post that agrees with you. Are you a crazy fellow or something or do I just rub you the wrong way for some reason.

 

Sorry it came out that way, but it was not an attack on your post. Pranams.

 

 

Who cares what his Godbrothers recognized or did not recognize? Not me. The fact that they had to what until a "herd" of white elephants showed up on their doorstep to see that he was a great devotee proves their spiritual vision was low class to begin with. They should have recognized his pure hearted attempt and helped out. Gargamuni Brahmananda Yamuna Dasi Jadurani dasi and others got the message before the herd was assembled and even helped assemble the herd. So who clued them in? Caitya-guru that's who. I prefer their vision over the godbrothers.

 

 

it has become fashionable among the devotees to perform "Iskcon guru bashing" in lieu of an honest evaluation - I'm guilty of it myself at times, but I try to be objective and use the came criteria for evaluating all spiritual masters, Prabhupada included.

 

as to lack of help from his godbrothers... well, it seems to me Srila Prabhupada was not very realistic at times. Early on for example he was expecting his godbrothers who were not at all financially well off to help him buy a building in NY and convert it into a temple. does that seem realistic to you? of course from his (and ours) perspective they should have helped. but at that time even Srila Prabhupada himself was not sure whether he will stay in US for good. what would you do if you were in their place?

 

 

Judging a devotees spiritual potency by head count would lead one to conclude that Bhavanada was more spiritually potent then Gaura Kishore das Babaji. Ludicrous.

 

I do not know any devotees who joined thanks to Bhavananda's preaching, but I know lots of good devotees who joined thanks to Indradyumna Maharaja's preaching. and it is not about who is better. it is about who is good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Siksas and diksas were plentiful at Naimasaranya. Including Vyasa, Narada, Parasara. They could not in one eyelash give any empowerment to Romaraharsana, who was slain by a blade of grass by the only one who gives empowerment to be His external manifestation as guru, all types, introductory, teacher, or initiator, Lord Sri Balarama.

 

This has been a grave misunderstanding over many decades, where is empowerment to represent Krsna springing from. There is no history where a guru makes the next guru, despite many claims to the contrary.

 

 

haribol, ys, mahaksadasa

 

Documented examples of Gurus empowering and ordering their disciples to become Gurus (siksa and diksa gurus)

 

1) Sri Jiva Goswami ordered his siksa disciple Syamananda Thakura (the history is well known) to leave his life of bhajan in Vraja-dham and go to his native place, preach and initiate disciples.

 

Interestingly, it is a widely known fact recorded in numerous old books that Syamananda Thakur's relationship with his diksa guru (Hridaya Caitanya Goswami) was more or less severed after his diksa guru beat him up in Vraja when he found out that Syamananda was now following Jiva Goswami.

 

Sri Jiva also ordered another two devotees, Srinivasa Acharya (disciple of Gopal Bhatta Goswami), and Narottama Thakura (disciple of Lokanatha) to go to Bengal and become a Guru.

 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

NOTE:::::::

Narottama is mentioned in the Guru Parampara list in Bhagavad Gita as it is, but the name of his diksa Guru (Lokanatha) is not mentioned. Devotees in Iskcon sing "Sri Guru Carana Padma... Lokanatha lokera jivana..." but almost none of them ever ask "why is Lokanatha's name not mentioned in the Guru Parampara list?"

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

 

3) Syamananda Thakura had over 250,000 initiated disciples (yes that number is right) and amongst those Rasikananda Thakura was chosen to be the leader of the sampradaya. Syamananda Thakura clearly stated that Rasikananda was his successor and all the descendents of Syamananda accept that this is was the choice and decision of Syamananda Thakura.

 

 

4) Visvanatha Cakravarti instructed Baladeva Vidyabhusana to preach in Jaipura, and after defeating the Ramanandi sholars he gave diksa to some of them. Baladeva Vidyabhusana was the initiated disciple of Radha-Damodara Goswami or Orissa, a third generation descendent of Rasikananda, the chosen successor of Syamananda Thakura.

 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

NOTE::::::::::

In the Guru Parampara list at the end of the introduction to "Bhagavad Gita as it is" it mentions Visvanatha as the Guru of Baladeva. No mention is given of the lineage of Gurus from Syamananda to Rasikananda to Radha-Damodara to Baladeva.

 

The person who empowered Baladeva to preach (Visvananatha) is listed as his Guru.

 

Whereas in the books of Baladeva he clearly states that he is the initiated disciple of Radha Damodara Goswami.

 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

 

5) Jagannatha dasa Babaji accepted Thakura Bhaktivinode as his disciple but he never gave him any sort of initiation. Thakura Bhaktivinode was the initiated disciple of Bipin Bihari Goswami, a caste goswami, but when this caste goswami opposed the worship at Mahaprabhu's birthplace in Mayapura a disagreement ensued and indeed Bipin Bihari Goswami rejected Thakura Bhaktivinode as his disciple.

 

6) Thakura Bhaktivinode instructed Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura to preach, establish temples and so forth. There is the text of a letter from Thakura Bhaktivinode to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura stating this on Narasingha Maharaja's web site.

 

7) Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura told his disciple Bhakti Saranga Goswami that when he went to London he could give diksa and accept disciples. Indeed Bhakti Saranga Goswami did initiate an Australian man and bring that disciple back to India to meet with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura.

 

:::::::::::

BTW, tomorrow is the Vyasa Puja day of Srila Bhakti Saranga Goswami and devotees from many Maths will gather at the temple of Bhakti Saranga Goswami at Imlitala in Vrindaban to give honour to this great devotee.

:::::::::::

 

 

8) Srila B. R. Sridhar Maharaj chose his disciple Swami. B. S. Govinda Dev Goswami Maharaj to be his successor Acharya.

 

9) B. P. Puri Gosai chose his disciple Sripad Bodhayana Maharaj as his successor.

 

...

 

Numerous other examples of less well known Acharyas can be given.

 

But without doubt the fact that Baladeva is listed as a disciple of his siksa guru Visvanantha in "Bhagavad Gita as it is" is the most obvious example of a siksa guru empowering a disciple, and the fact that Syamananda Thakura was known as a disciple of his siksa guru Sri Jiva Goswami prove that a Guru can select a disciple to be his successor and Acharya.

 

One Hawaiian guru who is now married to the divorced wife of one of his disciples often says that a Guru never chooses a successor. But this is foolishness. People with no knowledge of the real history of Gaudiya Vaisnavism may be fooled by the foolish ideas taught by neophytes. What to do? Maybe in their next life the followers of this neophyte will understand what the Vaisnava religion really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kulapavanna, It's cool. I wasn't talking about iskcon prabhu, I am far removed from there. Only speaking of levels of perfection in Krsna consciousness.

 

And I don't want to get too far into Prabhupada and his relationships with his Godbrothers only to say that realizing his empowerment from Krsna based on a head count after his mission is not the highest vision. Prabhupada himself came here with less than seven dollars and a bag of cereal grains. The difference was faith in the instructions of his spiritual master and the directions from Krsna in his heart.

 

At some point the phony gurus who popped up in 1978 also gave good instruction to others but the limit of the their ralization and faith was shown when the opputunity to grab the big chair appeared to be at hand.

 

The question of the thread was can a siksa guru empower one to accept one's own disciples. Within that question there are so many things that have to be understood before the question can be answered properly. What is a siksa guru first. What is it to be empowered second. These have to be correctly understood before the question of can such a person pass on that empowerment to someone else.

 

The idea of approaching these questions in an ecclesiastical context is meaningless to me and is the cause of so much confusion surrounding this issue.

 

I look for the truth that can be expressed in the simplest most direct way unemcumbered by ritual and formality. To me this means that one who knows God can introduce God to me if I am sincere. To know God is to love Him so this person who knows God can also teach me how to love God if I am sincere. If I follow his instructions externally and internally that will make me his disciple and also awaken love for God within myself.

 

It is absolutely meaningless if this is flow of transcendence is recognized by some offical religious body or institution or not.

 

This is personalist philosphy and not religious instituional philosophy.

 

This how I would answer the question posed by CCC and I feel confident in it.

 

Pranamas and Haribols

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ditto that, Beggar. If any prominent leaders of any Gaudiya-Math have made such declarations, let's have some evidence. And they didn't suddenly "decide" that Srila Prabhupada is their siksa guru. One of them has become famous for claiming that, but there's some historical basis for it. Another wrote four pranam mantras for Srila Prabhupada, one of which glorifies Srila Prabhupada as the best among millions of gurus, and another of which declares that he was empowered, having taken his guru's order on his head, to spread the glories of the Hare Krishna mahamantra in the West, and also in the East. There are so many nonsense accusations going around that it makes many embarrassed to have any connection with ISKCON. Ugh!

There's enough evidence and you know it. To post it here wouldn't change anything. Did Prabhupada try to correct the respected sadhus in charge of the maths? Not really. It is like it is, there're some hidden players who want Vaishnavism splintered into many small fractions and especially not to run examplary vedic agriculture and protecting the cow in the Western hemisphere. It's hard, but learn to live with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Early on for example he was expecting his godbrothers who were not at all financially well off to help him buy a building in NY and convert it into a temple. does that seem realistic to you?

Please provide evidence how you found out about the actual financial situation of the maths at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Please provide evidence how you found out about the actual financial situation of the maths at that time.

 

It was no secret to anybody at that time that GM temples were not wealthy. I have heard that from devotees who were familiar with these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's enough evidence and you know it. To post it here wouldn't change anything. Did Prabhupada try to correct the respected sadhus in charge of the maths? Not really. It is like it is, there're some hidden players who want Vaishnavism splintered into many small fractions and especially not to run examplary vedic agriculture and protecting the cow in the Western hemisphere. It's hard, but learn to live with it.

 

Oh I see, because math preachers repeat Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the Ramananda Samvad of the Caitanya Caritamrta saying that varnasrama dharma is external (like vaishya activities of agriculture and cow protection) they are trying to splinter Gaudiya Vaisnavism. If this is your charge then it should really be directed at the source of the conspiracy, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself. This idea that you are representing, that is popular in some ISKCON circles is for idiots who have no real idea of the Krsna Consciousness Movement's philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's enough evidence and you know it.

If you say so. . . . I have to say, though, that I'm not sure I'm cosmopolitan enough to know precisely of what or whom you write. I've never gotten around much. I've spent much of my adult life in the middle of the ocean, and even when I lived in California I didn't travel much or meet a lot of folks from ISKCON or other missions. I've only been to India twice (the last time in fall of '82), never visited any place in Europe. Even now, I really haven't met a lot of preachers from ISKCON or those other missions. I have met a few, though, and I haven't heard the "Prabhupada is not bona fide" line to which you refer.

 

Broad generalizations don't work for me. I taught English and writing at colleges and universities for over 16 years, and unsupported generalizations are signs of weak writing, probably faulty thinking.

 

 

To post it here wouldn't change anything.

I think that's mistaken. It may change the credibilty of your assertions for those unaware of what you're talking about.

 

Did Prabhupada try to correct the respected sadhus in charge of the maths? Not really. It is like it is, there're some hidden players who want Vaishnavism splintered into many small fractions and especially not to run examplary vedic agriculture and protecting the cow in the Western hemisphere. It's hard, but learn to live with it.
Sorry, but my life is small enough that I honestly don't think I know what--or who--the hell you're talking about here. I saw a sannyasi disciple of one "GM" guru curl his lip and almost spit at the thought of varnashrama (this sannyasi is from Europe, but I don't know anything else of his background). But I know others who are into living off the land and taking care of cows.

 

Anyway, the question that started this thread was something about how one may be "empowered" to accept students, and I'm not sure how this stuff is relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

.......for idiots who have no real idea of the Krsna Consciousness Movement's philosophy.
Thanks so much prabhu, I also wish you only the best.

May be I should post some recently written letters here to wake you up.

But no, better live with being called idiot.

Yes, if you say I'm an idiot it is true.

I can live at best with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

May be I should post some recently written letters here to wake you up.

 

 

Post them if you can and we will see how you have misinterpreted them through the foggy spectacles of bias and prejudice.

 

 

...unsupported generalizations are signs of weak writing, probably faulty thinking.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...