New booklet about Srila Prabhupada

[stonehearted 0]

Over the last few months I've been working on an essay bringing together the external evidence we have about Srila Prabhupada's internal life. It turned into a rather long piece, and it was great fun to write.

 

This essay gives us access to the diverse indications given by Srila Prabhupada by which we may understand his love for Krishna.

 

• Intimate stories from disciples
  
• The realizations of sadhus
  
• Signs from Srila Prabhupada's life
  
• Srila Prabhupada's own statements.

I'm offering this essay free online in two versions, one you can read online and one you can download as a pdf. If you find it interesting, feel free to share it with anyone you think might also find it interesting.

You may find this essay at http://cowdust.us/, where you'll be given the choice to either read it online or download it. Have fun, and feel free to leave thoughtful comments.I hope you’ll find it enlivening and thought provoking. And fun!

[AncientMariner 0]

It seems like Prabhupada is making a comeback in popularity amongst Krishna devotees. Just shows you, you can't keep a good man down.

[suchandra 1]

 

It seems like Prabhupada is making a comeback in popularity amongst Krishna devotees. Just shows you, you can't keep a good man down.

This is good news, Prabhupada is gaining popularity.

The ISKCON GBC has a program to "make a book" about the process of "paralell lines" where their acharyas are working under the authority of their Governing Body. This is exactly what the Pharisees told Jesus, "You have to work under our Pharisee's administration." Jesus said basically, no thanks, since the guru is not under the control of a "GBC" or Pharisee administrator board.

 

This was the first wrong idea in 1977, that the eleven gurus were going to be "administered" by the votes of a defective panel. Why would the guru need to be administered by the group votes of a panel in the first place?

 

Modern ISKCON is very much in line with the siddhanta of the Pharisees, they also say the acharya has to work under the authority of their administration board. Srila Prabhupada says NO, that the guru gets direct dication from God -- not -- from some administration board or panel. The GBC says their guru gets dictation not from God but from the GBC Pharisee's board. So the good news is that more devotees are realizing, we are not followers of the Pharisees? As a matter of fact the Pharisees are not at all helpful to the acharyas, we reject their ideas.

Basically, Jesus says in the Bible that the Pharisees are hyprocrites and vipers since Jesus also never approved of the idea that the acharya is subordinated to an administration governing body.

 

Can any neophyte become guru? "Guru is most confidential servant of God", so, how can a neophyte be "most confidential"?

 

Saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastrair uktas tatha bhavyata eva sadbhih kintu prabhor yah priya eva tasya. That is the definition of guru. Guru is accepted as good as God, saksad-dharitvena samasta-sastraih, in all Vedic literature, tatha bhavyata eva sadbhih, and those who are learned, advanced, they accept it. But what is the position of guru? Kintu prabhor yah priya eva tasya: “Guru is the most confidential servant of God.” That is his position.

 

Lecture at World Health Organization

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

Geneva, June 6, 1974

[ranjeetmore 0]

thanks a lot.

 

Jaya Prabhupada.so innocent and so childlike.

[stonehearted 0]

 

It seems like Prabhupada is making a comeback in popularity amongst Krishna devotees. Just shows you, you can't keep a good man down.

Interesting comment. For many of us, he has never left the core of our hearts. I don't know that he was ever down in any way.

 

Anyway, the booklet has nothing to do with GBC politics, or any of that. Completely different topic.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

I am quite sure that the booklet will become a hotly controversial issue much despised and ridiculed by ISKCON big shots and small timers as well.

What else could we expect from the camp of Tripurari Maharaja?

 

But, I will never be one to argue your conclusions as Prabhupada came to me in a dream in about 1982 and told me "so many they want to know who I am, but I can tell you ask Subala Sakha he knows".

 

I didn't draw any profound conclusions from the dream, but I thought it might have been some indication from Srila Prabhupada being in sakhya-rasa.

 

In my heart I can't really think of Srila Prabhupada in madhurya-rasa.

I do feel that he is in sakhya-rasa and a well-wisher of Lord Krishna.

[gHari 0]

As beautiful as the nectar is certain to be,

The jug begs my lips and my eyes to see.

 

My heart accepts your offering with tears, Dhanvantari.

 

Thank you, dear soft-hearted prabhu, Babhru.

 

 

gHari

[stonehearted 0]

Thanks gHari. That's really kind of you.

[stonehearted 0]

 

I am quite sure that the booklet will become a hotly controversial issue much despised and ridiculed by ISKCON big shots and small timers as well.

 

I wouldn't be shocked, but we'll see.

 

What else could we expect from the camp of Tripurari Maharaja?

Well, there's no attempt solely to create controversy--just to tie together the evidence I see.

 

 

But, I will never be one to argue your conclusions as Prabhupada came to me in a dream in about 1982 and told me "so many they want to know who I am, but I can tell you ask Subala Sakha he knows".

Makes sense to me.

 

 

I didn't draw any profound conclusions from the dream, but I thought it might have been some indication from Srila Prabhupada being in sakhya-rasa.

Could be. Especially considering you were what they call "in the fire" then. I wouldn't write it off.

 

 

In my heart I can't really think of Srila Prabhupada in madhurya-rasa.

I do feel that he is in sakhya-rasa and a well-wisher of Lord Krishna.

This is heart business, after all. It's not exactly a topic for tourists, though, is it?

[Sukhada 0]

 

I am quite sure that the booklet will become a hotly controversial issue much despised and ridiculed by ISKCON big shots and small timers as well.

What else could we expect from the camp of Tripurari Maharaja?

 

"When an individual endeavors to lift himself above his fellows, he is dragged down by the mass, either by means of ridicule or of calumny. No one shall be more virtuous or more intellectually gifted than others. Whoever, by the irresistible force of genius, rises above the common herd is certain to be ostracized by society, which will pursue him with such merciless derision and detraction that at last he will be compelled to retreat into the solitude of his thoughts." Heinrich Heine (poet)

[stonehearted 0]

Thanks for that, Sukhada. And if you're the same Sukhada who left the lovely excerpt from the Masters poem on the site, thank you thousands of times.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

The one thing that always sticks in my mind that seems to be a strong indication that Srila Prabhuapda was in fact in madhurya-rasa is in his concluding words to Nectar of Devotion:

 

 

Nectar of Devotion, Conclusion

 

Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī concludes by saying that Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu is very difficult for ordinary men to understand, yet he hopes that Lord Kṛṣṇa, the eternal Supreme Personality of Godhead, will be pleased with his presentation of this book.

 

By rough calculation it is estimated that Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī finished Śrī Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu in Gokula Vṛndāvana in the year 1552. While physically present, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī was living in different parts of Vṛndāvana, and his headquarters were in the temple of Rādhā-Dāmodara in the present city of Vṛndāvana. The place of Rūpa Gosvāmī's bhajana, execution of devotional service, is commemorated still. There are two different tomblike structures in the Rādhā-Dāmodara temple; one structure is called his place of bhajana, and in the other his body is entombed. Behind this very tomb I have my place of bhajana, but since 1965 I have been away. The place, however, is being taken care of by my disciples. By Kṛṣṇa's will, I am now residing at the Los Angeles temple of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. This purport is finished today, the 30th of June, 1969.

 

So, since 1965 Srila Prabhupada was away from his place of bhajan which appeared to be very oriented to madhurya-rasa being behind the tomb of Srila Rupa Goswami.

 

So, since 1965 Srila Prabhupada did not express any obvious and revealing signs of expressing madhurya-rasa.

He did express some sakhya-rasa symptoms as are well-documented in the booklet by Babhru Dasa.

 

So, it can be confusing.

If Srila Prabhupada was in fact in madhurya-rasa, he did a good job of concealing that upon his taking up a worldwide preaching mission.

 

It could very well be that Srila Prabhupada concealed his madhurya-rasa in an effort to protect madhurya-rasa from cheap imitations resulting from his worldwide mission.

 

His final words of NOD seem to say that his bhajan was in madhurya-rasa but that since 1965 he was away from that.

 

What he showed the world after 1965 seemed to be sakhya-rasa.

 

His bhajan in Vrindavan behind the tomb of Srila Rupa Goswami seems to have been steeped in madhurya-rasa.

 

He, after all did teach his disciples that "we are Rupanugas".

 

ISKCON was certainly never bereft of a strong tendency to madhurya-rasa from what I could see and feel in my years in ISKCON.

 

Even after reading Srila Prabhuapda's books I quickly came to that conclusion in my first years in ISKCON.

 

But, as Sridhar Maharaja explained, if in fact he was shaktya-vesha of Nityananda Prabhu, those sakhya-sentiments could very well have been the sakhya-rasa of Nityananda Prabhu coming through Srila Prabhupada.

 

I have never come to a certain conclusion.

I see evidence going both ways.

 

Personally, I look for the clues in his books more so than in any other extraneous considerations.

 

To me, Srila Prabhupada almost seems like an incarnation of Godhead more so than an incarnation of any particular parshada.

 

 

One time a Hindu man referred to Srila Prabhupada as an incarnation of Vyasadeva.

Srila Prabhupada just smiled.

(so the story goes)

 

Could he be a combined incarnation of Vyasadeva and Lord Nityananda?

[Sonic Yogi 0]

Another thought about Srila Prabhupada being away from his "place of bhajan since 1965" is that he says :

 

 

The place, however, is being taken care of by my disciples.

So, Srila Prabhupada left his place of bhajan and possibly the mood of his bhajan to preach worldwide, but his disciples take care of that place of bhajan.

 

To me, that possibly means that even though Srila Prabhupada was away from his bhajan and his inner mood since 1965, his disciples were caring for the place and also following in that mood behind the tomb of Srila Rupa Goswami.

[Sukhada 0]

The idea that Srila Prabhupada concealed a sentiment for madhurya for preaching is really questionable due to the fact that he didn't conceal the concept of madhurya-rasa. It's in all of his books. So if he preached widely that madhurya rasa is the highest, why make a show to express another sentiment? The logic of that seems very weak. Concealing one's own sentiment is, of course, common, but why express another sentiment?

 

It is one thing to show deference to Nityananda Prabhu by establishing temples of Gaura-Nitai and Krsna-Balarama Mandir, but quite another for Srila Prabhupada to directly say on more than one occasion that he is a cowherd boy.

 

So I'm a little confused why you have found so much significance in that quote from Nectar of Devotion. Why search for obscure clues when Srila Prabhupada has spoken directly? Especially in light of all the evidence that Babhru presents in his booklet. Did you read it yet?

[Sukhada 0]

I don't think that it is correct to say that Srila Prabhupada was away from his bhajana and inner mood since 1965. It is more accurate to say that his bhajana overflowed into preaching. Furthermore, he was preaching while he was at Radha-Damodara. He was a gosthyanandi from beginning to end.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

The idea that Srila Prabhupada concealed a sentiment for madhurya for preaching is really questionable due to the fact that he didn't conceal the concept of madhurya-rasa. It's in all of his books. So if he preached widely that madhurya rasa is the highest, why make a show to express another sentiment? The logic of that seems very weak. Concealing one's own sentiment is, of course, common, but why express another sentiment?

 

It is one thing to show deference to Nityananda Prabhu by establishing temples of Gaura-Nitai and Krsna-Balarama Mandir, but quite another for Srila Prabhupada to directly say on more than one occasion that he is a cowherd boy.

 

So I'm a little confused why you have found so much significance in that quote from Nectar of Devotion. Why search for obscure clues when Srila Prabhupada has spoken directly? Especially in light of all the evidence that Babhru presents in his booklet. Did you read it yet?

I do remember that Srila Sridhar Maharaja reserved ultimate judgement on the matter and conceded that the sakhya-rasa sentiments expressed by Srila Prabhupada could have been an upsurge caused by the avesha of Lord Nityananda entering into the heart of Srila Prabhupada.

 

As best I can recall, Srila Sridhar Maharaja never issued a final decree on the matter and reserved giving any final judgement on the matter.

 

Most certainly, Srila Prabhupada's love for Krishna takes a back seat to nobody.

 

Several times in his books he explains that madhurya-rasa is the highest.

 

How can a parshada in sakhya-rasa be preaching that madhurya-rasa is the highest?

 

I can't help but think that the love Srila Prabhupad had for Krishna was of the highest quality, though his being a shaktya-vesha of Nityananda caused the expression of a very prominent sakhya-rasa.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

Do to a lack of an anti-party on this topic I will heretofore become the champion of the school of thought that Srila Prabhupada was in fact in madhurya-rasa.

So, bear with me as we milk this topic for some interesting debate.

 

As I said, I am not convinced one way or the other.

 

To me, Srila Prabhupada is an incarnation of Godhead - shaktya-vesha avatara.

But, for the sake of discussion I will consider him a parshada instead.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

 

Several times in his books he explains that madhurya-rasa is the highest.

 

How can a parshada in sakhya-rasa be preaching that madhurya-rasa is the highest?

 

 

Can anyone please supply a good answer to this question?

[Sukhada 0]

 

I do remember that Srila Sridhar Maharaja reserved ultimate judgement on the matter and conceded that the sakhya-rasa sentiments expressed by Srila Prabhupada could have been an upsurge caused by the avesha of Lord Nityananda entering into the heart of Srila Prabhupada.

 

As best I can recall, Srila Sridhar Maharaja never issued a final decree on the matter and reserved giving any final judgement on the matter.

 

Most certainly, Srila Prabhupada's love for Krishna takes a back seat to nobody.

 

Several times in his books he explains that madhurya-rasa is the highest.

 

How can a parshada in sakhya-rasa be preaching that madhurya-rasa is the highest?

 

I can't help but think that the love Srila Prabhupad had for Krishna was of the highest quality, though his being a shaktya-vesha of Nityananda caused the expression of a very prominent sakhya-rasa.

Srila Sridhara Maharaja's own opinion on the matter was that Srila Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa. However, due to the complaints of some and his harmonizing nature, he gave an alternative way of thinking about it.

 

As for your question, "How can a parshada in sakhya-rasa be preaching that madhurya-rasa is the highest," the answer is very simple: tattva is one thing and bhava is another. According to tattva, one mood is higher, but according to bhava, everyone thinks their bhava is the highest. For preaching/siddhanta, one has to take the neutral standpoint, as Rupa Goswami did in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (as opposed to Ujjvala-nilamani, which is a book about bhajana). Srila Prabhupada also answers your question very nicely in the booklet (hint, hint). May I humbly suggest we all read the booklet first and discuss from there.

[Sukhada 0]

I should have said that according to bhava, there is no higher or lower.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja's own opinion on the matter was that Srila Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa. However, due to the complaints of some and his harmonizing nature, he gave an alternative way of thinking about it.

 

As for your question, "How can a parshada in sakhya-rasa be preaching that madhurya-rasa is the highest," the answer is very simple: tattva is one thing and bhava is another. According to tattva, one mood is higher, but according to bhava, everyone thinks their bhava is the highest. For preaching/siddhanta, one has to take the neutral standpoint, as Rupa Goswami did in Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (as opposed to Ujjvala-nilamani, which is a book about bhajana). Srila Prabhupada also answers your question very nicely in the booklet (hint, hint). May I humbly suggest we all read the booklet first and discuss from there.

 

I heard all these arguments for sakhya-rasa back in the early eighties.

Bhakti Sudhir Maharaja was the first devotee in the movement to start talking and preaching about this subject.

 

It was during that time I was with Sudhir Maharaja that I had my dream referred to in an earlier post on this topic.

 

Most all these arguments for sakhya-rasa were originally made by Sudhir Maharaja back in the early 80's.

 

I heard all the tapes and talks of Sridhar Maharaja on the topic and I know for certain he did not give a final decree on the matter of Srila Prabhupada's rasa.

 

Personally, I don't accept the conclusion of anyone who has not read very closely all the writings of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja did not read all the writings of Srila Prabhupada.

He heard a couple of songs Srila Prabhupada wrote and noticed that he installed Krsna-Balarama on the central altar at Krsna-Balarama Mandir.

 

Sridhar Maharaja also said that Srila Prabhupada might have installed Krsna-Balarama on the central altar out of appreciation for the power that Lord Nityananda gave him to preach to all the fallen souls of the world.

 

Back then I was hoping and praying that Tripurari Maharaja would give up trying to become an ISKCON guru and just take shelter of Srila Sridhar Maharaja.

 

Eventually my prayers were answered and one of my favorite Godbrothers Tripurari Maharaja gave up trying to become a voted in guru of ISKCON and took guidance from Srila Sridhar Maharaja.

 

I was very happy about that.

[mud 0]

 

To me, Srila Prabhupada is an incarnation of Godhead - shaktya-vesha avatara.

But, for the sake of discussion I will consider him a parshada instead.

I'm uncomfortable with the way you are speaking about this, and I fear that some confusion here could lead to further misrepresentation of tattva, especially since we are trying to sort out finer elements of tattva. In the booklet, Sridhar Maharaj explains his opinion of Srila Prabhupada being saktyavesa, specifically Nityanandavesa. Your consideration of Prabhupada as parsada "for the sake of discussion" seems strange to me. If not for the sake of discussion, who would you be advocating Prabhupada to be, God?

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja's own opinion on the matter was that Srila Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa. However, due to the complaints of some and his harmonizing nature, he gave an alternative way of thinking about it.

 

 

That is an opinion that cannot be confirmed by any documented statements of Srila Sridhar Maharaja.

 

I have been pondering this question since 1975.

It's not something that I just started to think about since Babhru prabhu wrote his highly controversial booklet and posted it on the forum.

[Sonic Yogi 0]

 

I'm uncomfortable with the way you are speaking about this, and I fear that some confusion here could lead to further misrepresentation of tattva, especially since we are trying to sort out finer elements of tattva. In the booklet, Sridhar Maharaj explains his opinion of Srila Prabhupada being saktyavesa, specifically Nityanandavesa. Your consideration of Prabhupada as parsada "for the sake of discussion" seems strange to me. If not for the sake of discussion, who would you be advocating Prabhupada to be, God?

 

What I would say is that sadly all this discussion of rasa of the acharya is sorrowfully tied into the siddha-pranali system and Srila Prabhupada avoided it, negated it and keep it a well kept secret.

 

OK, so now let's all take up the siddha-pranali concept.

 

Ultimately, none of it is up for debate or discussion.

It is a private matter between the guru and disciple.

 

Hence, I prefer to see Srila Prabhupada as an incarnation of Godhead and not really come to a solid conclusion about his rasa with Krsna as a parshada.

 

I really don't know for sure and I don't think anyone knows for sure.

Srila Prabhupada kept it a secret and he had his reasons i.e. the siddha-pranali aversion.

[Sukhada 0]

If you think you have heard all the arguments back in the 80s and therefore you don't have to read the book, you're missing out. There is a lot of evidence that Srila Sridhara Maharaja didn't have access to but which only confirms his insight. As Lao-tzu said, "To see things in the seed, that is genius."

 

Don't think that the book is about pushing some agenda, imposing something on Srila Prabhupada. This is exactly what is so refreshing about the book. There is no forced agenda. It lets Srila Prabhupada speak for himself. There has been a lot of propaganda that Srila Prabhupada is in madhurya-rasa. This book is a contrast to that.