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

New booklet about Srila Prabhupada

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

From what I can see, Tripurari Maharaja has clearly departed orthodox ISKCON (Prabhupada) and started to mix and blend with concepts from the "orthodox" school which actually uses the siddha-pranali system.

 

It is not for me to say that it is all wrong.

I can say that I don't see his teachings and his position today as being reflective of orthodox ISKCON or Srila Sridhar Maharaja's representation of the Saraswata Gaudiya position.

 

Maybe he wants to carve out himself a niche that is unique and different.

That is his buisness.

 

But, I don't see his position nowadays as being orthodox Prabhupada teachings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, thanks for actually starting the book Sonic. I know that you have a tendency to find fault and so this might be a good opportunity to check that tendency and step back and listen to what the author has to say. Think about it AFTER you read it, not during every word, every sentence. Your orientation towards critical, nitpicking, picking apart, etc. takes you way beyond being an analytical thinker to the point where you manifest a kind of bizarre "grumpy old man" quality, with the stubborness of the greatest of donkeys. It only demonstrates that you have reached a conclusion before you started and therefore the font even bothers you! Just give it a try... Read the whole thing, let some in, play around with it in your head for a while and then come visit after a few days of contemplation.

 

If my suspicion that you will not do that is justified, I want to thank you for not degrading the dialog into wild speculation and rumors of what you think about sastra or people who speak on sastra... At least for this one post :P.

This statement needs to be clarified.

What is meant in this statement by Srila Prabhupada is that Lord Brahma in his relative position as Lord Brahma is in sakhya-rasa with Krsna.

Okay, I know you've been going with this "relative" rasa idea for quite a while. Maybe this idea merits some discussion. In this instance you are clarifying the definite words of Prabhupada because you find contradiction between guru and param-guru. Generally in such cases we try to clarify our understanding, rather than the guru's words. So, in that spirit:

Brahma is directly shaking hands with Krsna, so I don't know if this could be called an "external" or "relative" relationship. True, it is in relation to his duty in the material world (creating it!), but I think it is significant that Brahma is directly relating with Krsna here. Also, Brahma's relationship during Krsna's vraja pastimes is in relation to the sakha's.

 

 

So, the Gaudiya parampara is about the internal, eternal rasa of the spiritual master, not about his rasa involving his external functions in relation with the material energy.
While it is true that the activities of the siddha's are difficult to understand, I think your introduction of some concept of "external" rasa is a major stretch. The acarya's don't have a rasa with the material energy! If anything, some of their internal spirit MAY on very rare occasions, come out. But to generalize the whole of their "material" personality as being differen from the internal rasa gives us absolutely no evidence that we can base things on.

 

 

This is a good example of the situation of Srila Prabhupada as well.

Externally, to do his preaching work he was in the sakhya-rasa much like Lord Brahma is.

The external activities cannot change the internal bhava. It sounds like you are saying everything to do with the material world has some sort of masculine "rasa" to it. If so, is BSST manifesting the external bhava of a Nrsimha bhakta because he was fierce in his preaching? And if so, what external rasa designates one's internal rasa? If you do "masculine" work in the material world are you automatically feminine in Goloka? I ask these crazy questions because you have given no solid evidence to tell us why Prabhupada's internal rasa is that of madhurya despite what you call his deference towards sakhya in "material" preaching work.

 

He did not manifest his internal heart of hearts but showed the mood in which he carried out his preaching work in the material world in a male body.
???????????????????????

 

Regarding Prabhupada and BSST seeing Brahma differently, this could be an instance like has been described in Babhru's book and suggested by Tripurari Swami of two disciples seeing the guru (in this case the head of the sampradaya) as manifesting their personal ideal. What cha think? That's a nice little harmonizing thought eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raga bhakti is centered on following in the wake of the bhava of a devotee of Vraja. If that devotee is Prabhupada, one will have to become familiar with his svarupa. One will search for him in earnest in one's bhajana, not though speculation or some artificial process but through sincerity of sadhana and heartfelt chanting of the holy name. And in time Prabhupada's position in the lila will be revealed. At that time, the disciple will also realize his own svarupa and enter the lila as an eternal servant of Prabhupada as he appears in his svarupa. If before all of this a disciple who pays close attention finds external hints inevitably left by the guru (since despite his efforts his bhava will be difficult to entirely conceal), all the better. We know the direction to look. All of this is just basic Gaudiya Vaisnavism as taught by Prabhupada himself, and this is all that Tripurari Maharaja is saying in the foreword. You are making something out of nothing.

 

The external rasa of Brahama idea is kooky to say the least. According to Brihat-bhagavatamrta, the entire darsana that Krsna gave Brahma was internal, not external. He experienced Krsna shaking his hand within his heart.

 

Prabhupada's opinion on Brahma's rasa differs from that of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura because his opinion arises from his bhava. It is not the only point on which Srila Prabhupada differed from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, but such differences are not based on anarthas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If that devotee is Prabhupada, one will have to become familiar with his svarupa.

[...]

 

It is not the only point on which Srila Prabhupada differed from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, but such differences are not based on anarthas.

 

Don't get me wrong but this doesn't sound like a humble Vaishnava is speaking but someone who is in the position high above........something like God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In his preaching work in the material world Srila Prabhupada had a male form, so externally his showed some sakhya-rasa of male friendship to Krsna.

He did not manifest his internal heart of hearts but showed the mood in which he carried out his preaching work in the material world in a male body.

 

You keep making this absurd connection between male bodyies or what are socially regarded as male qualities and the eternal spiritual form of acharyas. It is so silly. Guess who else had male bodies in the material world:

Bhaktisiddhanta, Bhaktivinoda, Srila Sridhara Maharaja, Gaura-Kishora dasa Babaji, Jagganath Das Babaji, YOU(having acknowledged your attraction for madhurya rasa earlier in this thread), shall I continue?:deal:

 

As sukhada pointed out, the difference about Brahma was the bhava of the commentator, much like in Jaiva Dharma how the two disciples saw their guru differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sonic your idea of progressing through rasas is the name of them being dynamic is completely backwards. Yes prema is dynamic, but that does not mean one has to perpetually abandon "lower" prema. By saying such you are essentially saying that all but Radha's prema is measurable, and thus when a gopa (for example) desires to serve Krsna more he has developed X amount of prema and thus qualified for the next stage. Of course you have arbitrarily decided the process culminates in sakhi-bhava, whereas I would think the speculation would be more attractive if you offered us the prospect to become a Radharani. Maya means to measure. It is NOT just simple math, it is bhava:smash:.

 

You are also saying that one cannot eternally relish a specific lila. This is off as well. The gopa does not think that because he had Krsna's laddu yesterday, hopefully today he can transform into a gopi to serve him in that way. Siddhas are not fickle like your logic is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Madhya 1.41 Purport

 

Thus there are five waves in the dakṣiṇa-vibhāga division. In the western division (paścima-vibhāga) there is a description of the chief transcendental humors derived from devotional service. These are known as mukhya-bhakti-rasa-nirūpaṇa, or attainment of the chief humors or feelings in the execution of devotional service. In that part there is a description of devotional service in neutrality, further development in love and affection (called servitude), further development in fraternity, further development in parenthood, or parental love, and finally conjugal love between Kṛṣṇa and His devotees. Thus there are five waves in the western division.

 

 

Madhya 23.44 : TRANSLATION

"Just as the taste of sugar increases as it is gradually purified, one should understand that when love of Godhead increases from rati, which is compared to the beginning seed, its taste increases.

 

 

 

Madhya 23.47 : Translation

"When the permanent ecstasies [neutrality, servitorship and so on] are mixed with other ingredients, devotional service in love of Godhead is transformed and becomes composed of transcendental mellows.

 

 

And how does one experiencing his permanent ecstasy (sthayi bhava) in servitor rasa experience his love transform and become composed of "more tasteful" transcendenal mellows? Mixing of other ingredients?

 

Madhuya 23.48 :TRANSLATION

"The permanent ecstasy becomes a more and more tasteful transcendental mellow through the mixture of special ecstasy, subordinate ecstasy, natural ecstasy and transitory ecstasy.

 

 

Madhya 23.54 : TRANSLATION

"The position of neutrality increases up to the point where one can appreciate love of Godhead. The mellow of servitorship gradually increases to the point of spontaneous love of Godhead

 

 

Sounds like some real distinctions here.

 

Madhya 23.55

TRANSLATION

"After the mellow of servitorship, there are the mellows of friendship and paternal love, which increase to subordinate spontaneous love. The greatness of the love found in friends like Subala extends to the standard of ecstatic love of Godhead.

 

PURPORT

Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura says that the mellow of neutrality increases to simple love of Godhead. In the mellow of servitorship, love of Godhead increases beyond that to affection, counter-love (anger based on love), love and attachment. Similarly, the mellow of friendship increases to affection, counter-love, love, attachment and subattachment. It is the same with the mellow of paternal affection. The special feature of the mellow of friendship exhibited by personalities like Subala is that it increases from fraternal affection to counter-love, to spontaneous attachment, to subordinate attachment, and finally to the ecstasy where all the ecstatic symptoms continuously exist.

 

 

 

AS if the direct evidence of the translation of Madhya 23.54 were not enough, after reading the purport to Madhya 23.55, a reasonable person would figure that dasya rasa, not affording an individual the capacity to experience ecstasy where all the ecstatic symptoms continually exist, would be a stepping stone as previously indicated.

 

 

Madhya 23.57

TRANSLATION

"Only in the conjugal mellow are there two ecstatic symptoms called rūḍha [advanced] and adhirūḍha [highly advanced]. The advanced ecstasy is found among the queens of Dvārakā, and the highly advanced ecstasies are found among the gopīs.

PURPORT

The adhirūḍha ecstasies are explained in the Ujjvala-nīlamaṇi:

 

 

 

rūḍhoktebhyo 'nubhāvebhyaḥ

kām apy āptā viśiṣṭatām

yatrānubhāvā dṛśyante

so 'dhirūḍho nigadyate

 

 

The very sweet attraction of conjugal love increases through affection, counter-love, love, attachment, subattachment, ecstasy and highly advanced ecstasy (mahābhāva). The platform of mahābhāva includes rūḍha and adhirūḍha. These platforms are possible only in conjugal love. Advanced ecstasy is found in Dvārakā, whereas highly advanced ecstasy is found among the gopīs.

 

 

Perhaps this is the reason Sri Uddhava wished to take his next birth as a clump of grass in order to get the dust of the lotus feet of the gopis.

 

In the face of all the evidence, is just the height of insanity for anyone to insist that there is no method of increase in ecstasy, that one in servitor rasa in Vaikuntha can never change rasas, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you download the PDF and view it in a pdf viewer, then the diacritics will be fine. Dont worry about copying and pasting, by now we all know Çri means Sri. Lame excuse to get out of actually addressing the contents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess what Prabhus, It all comes down to who is qualified to give the definitive answer. And not only that, but who is even qualified to hear the definitive answer. This is not a court case based on the preponderance of evidence as the author seems to assert. Yes, it comes down to who is qualified to be guru. Or at least amongst gurus who is senior and who is junior. Is there anyone more senior than the "living" authorities that you are approaching? Yep, the guru thing, the rtvik thing comes full circle. You don't think that anyone has more realization? Are you ready for this? Ready or not, hear it comes!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had always seen myself as a friend. Then I realized that I was ready to give up my very existence to protect Krsna (not that He would ever need that). So now I've come so far only to find myself back where I started with the same question, on another level. Who am I?

 

With the evidence finally presented about Srila Goura Govinda Swami and the Kama mantra and indeed Bs 5.28 it's beginning to sound to me like another Crow and Tal Fruit debate that will serve mainly to engage our minds and hearts in churning that ocean of Prabhupada katha mentioned in the booklet.

 

If we can remain not committed to either the Crow or Tal Fruit positions, remain objective, then this can be a sweet pastime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good question, but not one that can be answered by this discussion.

 

Of course, Krishna's friends can be divided into four broad groups. One is the priyanarma sakhas, who we've discussed here, and who are discussed in the booklet. Another is the suhrit sakhas. These are the friends who are a little older, and whose friendship is tinged with a little vatsalya, in the sense that they feel protective toward Krishna. They are his well wishers, headed by Baladeva, who is instructed every morning as they head out to make sure he keeps his little brother out of trouble.

 

As far as kama-gayatri, those mantras don't produce anything, as far as I understand. Rather, they support the revelation of our relationship with the holy names, as well as our relationship with the Lord. And that mantra, which, along with the Gopala mantra, is universal to all Chaitanya vaishnavas, central to their practice, is there in the lines of the dvadasa gopalas, as well. Krishna das babaji, who is acknowledged universally as being in sakhya-rati, also chanted that mantra. It didn't turn him into a gopi or manjari.

 

The problem in the discussion is that some apparently want to prove that Srila Prabhupada and all our teachers can be situated only in madhurya rasa, and that we must aspire for that and nothing else. But that's not what Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu teaches. In Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, Krishna das has Lord Krishna thinking like this as He considers coming as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu:

yuga-dharma pravartaimu nama-sankirtana

cari bhava-bhakti diya nacamu bhuvana

 

"I shall personally inaugurate the religion of the age -- nama-sankirtana, the congregational chanting of the holy name. I shall make the world dance in ecstasy, realizing the four mellows of loving devotional service (ADi 3.19)."

 

Cari bhava: He came to start the sankirtan movement and bring us to one of the four flavors of love with which the residents of Vraja please Govinda.

 

In fact, my essay seeks to prove not that Srila Prabhupada must certainly be in sakhya rasa, although I find the evidence compelling. It seeks to demonstrate that it is at least possible that this is the case, based on guru, sadhu, and sastra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

...The problem in the discussion is that some apparently want to prove that Srila Prabhupada and all our teachers can be situated only in madhurya rasa, and that we must aspire for that and nothing else. But that's not what Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu teaches. In Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita, Krishna das has Lord Krishna thinking like this as He considers coming as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu:

yuga-dharma pravartaimu nama-sankirtana

cari bhava-bhakti diya nacamu bhuvana

 

"I shall personally inaugurate the religion of the age -- nama-sankirtana, the congregational chanting of the holy name. I shall make the world dance in ecstasy, realizing the four mellows of loving devotional service (ADi 3.19)."

 

Cari bhava: He came to start the sankirtan movement and bring us to one of the four flavors of love with which the residents of Vraja please Govinda.

 

 

Who could be influencing devotees to do that? Could it be Narayana Maharaja? What does he have to say about this:

 

Srila Narayana Maharaja:

 

...Srila Svami Maharaja came to give what is already in each soul.

krti-sadhya bhavet sadhya-

bhava sa sadhanabhidha

nitya-siddhasya bhavasya

prakatyam hrdi sadhyata

[“When transcendental devotional service, by which love for Krsna is attained, is executed by the senses, it is called sadhana-bhakti, or the regulative discharge of devotional service. Such devotion eternally exists within the heart of every living entity. The awakening of this eternal devotion is the potentiality of devotional service in practice.”]

The soul is perfect in itself. The soul’s relation with Krsna, its name, qualities and all specialities, are already present within. This perfection is not brought from outside. Unfortunately maya covers it, but Sri Guru removes that maya and then everything manifests automatically.

This pure prema will not come by any efforts or any sadhana. What is there will come out; no new thing will come. No type of association can change what is already in the soul.

What is in your soul will manifest by sravana (hearing), kirtana (chanting) and smarana (remembering). Whatever rasa is in the soul will manifest. If it is dasya-rasa, then dasya-rasa will manifest. It is a fact that if someone is in madhurya-rasa, he will have only a little taste for dasya or sakhya-rasa. This will automatically come – it will come when our anarthas will disappear.

It is sometimes misunderstood that Srila Svami Maharaja was only in sakhya-rasa, and that he cannot give madhurya-rasa. This is not a fact. He came only for spreading the same mission to the world that was brought by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

 

 

The problem in the discussion is that some apparently want to prove that Srila Prabhupada and all our teachers can be situated only in madhurya rasa, and that we must aspire for that and nothing else.

 

Maybe some posters here have done that, but which substantial preacher, substantial authority in the Gaudiya Saraswat line has done or is doing this?

 

The answer is none! And this is the premise that seems to be behind much of the effort. Therefore it is a false premise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Who could be influencing devotees to do that? Could it be Narayana Maharaja? What does he have to say about this:

 

Maybe some posters here have done that, but which substantial preacher, substantial authority in the Gaudiya Saraswat line has done or is doing this?

 

The answer is none! And this is the premise that seems to be behind much of the effort. Therefore it is a false premise!

Beggar, thanks for helping me clarify that remark. I am very encouraged by the quotation you posted from Narayana Maharaja, and I certainly agree with that. As I said earlier, the svarupa is the soul, inherent in the soul, we are who we are, and no one gives us one bhava or another. That's what we see in Jaiva Dharma, and that's what we see in Bhaktivinoda Thakura's approach to the whole idea of the siddhasvarupa. And that's something that distinguishes our approach from other Gaudiya vaishnava lines.

 

I have accused no one in particular of this misconception, but we have seen it in some posts here, and I have encountered it elsewhere. I'm not interested in accusations, personalities, bickering, etc. I'm interested in the principle. Once, when a devotee made such a presentation (that there's no possibility that Prabhupada or any acharya can be in any rasa except madhurya), that devotee called me the next day and left an apology that was two messages long, even though I hadn't objected the previous night. (Apparently other devotees also felt this presentation was over the top and that I and another devotee must have been annoyed by it.) So the premise that I'm accusing anyone of anything is itself a false premise based on misreading, or misunderstanding, this little essay.

 

As far as Narayana Maharaja is concerned, he's a preacher whose company I've taken on several occasions, form whom I've heard many wonderful discussions of hari katha, and many of whose followers are dear, long-time friends of mine. And I have already received complaints from some devotees who think the last couple of paragraphs of my essay gives, or at least implies, permission for those influenced by a greed for gopi bhava to take siksa from outside ISKCON. So I'm danged if I do and danged if I don't, and that's okay.

 

Okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to this statement in NOD ch.4, even liberated souls in Vaikuntha can develop affection for Krsna and get promoted to Krsnaloka.

 

 

From the above statement it is found that a devotee is not after any of the stages of liberation. There are five stages of liberation, already explained as being (1) to become one with the Lord, (2) to live on the same planet as the Lord, (3) to obtain the same bodily features as the Lord, (4) to have the same opulences as the Lord and (5) to have constant association with the Lord. Out of these five liberated stages, the one which is known as sāyujya, or to merge into the existence of the Lord, is the last to be accepted by a devotee. The other four liberations, although not desired by devotees, still are not against the devotional ideals. Some of the liberated persons who have achieved these four stages of liberation may also develop affection for Kṛṣṇa and be promoted to the Goloka Vṛndāvana planet in the spiritual sky. In other words, those who are already promoted to the Vaikuṇṭha planets and who possess the four kinds of liberation may also sometimes develop affection for Kṛṣṇa and become promoted to Kṛṣṇaloka.

So, considering this, I don't know if I can agree with Narayana Maharaja on his version as Begger posted above.

 

Here we have a liberated soul in Vaikuntha with a body like Lord Narayana or Laksmi Devi, some of whom attained that position from material existence by the mercy of a guru in the sampradaya that worships Lord Narayana, then after attaining liberation and service to Narayana laters can attain to love of Krsna and be PROMOTED to Krsnaloka.

 

So, nitya-siddhas can also improve their position in love of God if they are so inclined.

 

Our rasa with Krsna is chosen by us.

It is not appointed by some inborn nature.

 

 

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 22.160

 

kṛṣṇaḿ smaran janaḿ cāsya

preṣṭhaḿ nija-samīhitam

tat-tat-kathā-rataś cāsau

kuryād vāsaḿ vraje sadā

 

 

SYNONYMS

kṛṣṇam — Lord Kṛṣṇa; smaran — thinking of; janam — a devotee; ca — and; asya — of His; preṣṭham — very dear; nija-samīhitam — chosen by oneself; tat-tat-kathā — to those respective topics; rataḥ — attached; ca — and; asau — that; kuryāt — should do; vāsam — living; vraje — in Vṛndāvana; sadā — always.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"'The devotee should always think of Kṛṣṇa within himself and should choose a very dear devotee who is a servitor of Kṛṣṇa in Vṛndāvana. One should constantly engage in topics about that servitor and his loving relationship with Kṛṣṇa, and one should live in Vṛndāvana. If one is physically unable to go to Vṛndāvana, he should mentally live there.'

 

 

PURPORT

This verse is also found in the Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu (1.2.294).

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 22.161

 

dāsa-sakhā-pitrādi-preyasīra gaṇa

rāga-mārge nija-nija-bhāvera gaṇana

 

 

SYNONYMS

dāsa — servants; sakhā — friends; pitṛ-ādi — parents; preyasīra gaṇa — conjugal lovers; rāga-mārge — on the path of spontaneous loving service; nija-nija — of one's own choice; bhāvera — of the ecstasy; gaṇana — counting.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"Kṛṣṇa has many types of devotees — some are servants, some are friends, some are parents, and some are conjugal lovers. Devotees who are situated in one of these attitudes of spontaneous love according to their choice are considered to be on the path of spontaneous loving service.

 

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 22.159

 

nijābhīṣṭa kṛṣṇa-preṣṭha pācheta' lāgiyā

nirantara sevā kare antarmanā hañā

 

SYNONYMS

nija-abhīṣṭa — one's own choice; kṛṣṇa-preṣṭha — the servitor of Kṛṣṇa; pācheta' lāgiyā — following; nirantara — twenty-four hours a day; sevā — service; kare — executes; antarmanā — within the mind; hañā — being.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"Actually the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana are very dear to Kṛṣṇa. If one wants to engage in spontaneous loving service, he must follow the inhabitants of Vṛndāvana and constantly engage in devotional service within his mind.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Again, in this verse it repeats "nija-abhīṣṭa — one's own choice".

 

It is not inborn but it is chosen.

That is the shastric version.

 

It wouldn't be LOVE if we didn't have a say in which way we want to love Krsna.

If it was inborn, then we would have no real choice in which way to love Krsna and that would then NOT be love.

 

It would be appointed and not chosen.

 

 

No my friends, we choose our rasa with Krishna.

It is not appointed or innate.

 

The only thing that is innate is that we are constitutionally made as to be servants of Krsna in what ever capacity we CHOOSE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ya don' say?! We call it sadhu-ninda.

 

So, if I have a different opinion that someone else I am then a sadhu ninda?

 

You are a fanatic.

 

Fanatics always start yelling "offender, offender" every time somebody disagrees with a sannyasi.

 

Titles and positions don't grant anyone immunity from misconceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yogurt, those quotations are not on point. They address choosing a devotee to follow, based on the taste that arises as we are purified by hearing and chanting, etc., not choosing a rasa. We see this in Raghunath das babaji's questions to Vijay Kumar and Vrajanath in Jaiva Dharma. This is what we learn from our acharyas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Krsnaloka.

So, considering this, I don't know if I can agree with Narayana Maharaja on his version as Begger posted above.

 

Guru is one.

 

Guru: Look, over there. Is it a rope or a snake?

Disciple: It is a snake.

Guru: Are you sure, but look again for actually you will see that its a rope.

Disciple: Yes, yes, now I see it. It is a rope.

Guru: Actually it is a snake, look carefully.

Disciple: No, no, I have seen.

Guru: But you have not really seen, it is really snake after, so look.

Disciple: Yes, I will look. Oh my Gurudeva, yes, yes, it is a snake!

Guru: Now look again my disciple for you will see that you are incorrect...

 

(I know that Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that he is "not wholly one with Swami Maharaja",

but on certain points and on certain levels they are one, around 99.9% of the time as are all real Gaudiya Saraswat gurus. Not only will the guru contradict perhaps another guru, but he will appear to contradict himself, but it is our limitations....)

Take a look at the whole article:

http://www.purebhakti.com/teachers/bhakti-discourses-mainmenu-61/18-discourses-1990s/128-rupanuga-and-raganuga.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yogurt, those quotations are not on point. They address choosing a devotee to follow, based on the taste that arises as we are purified by hearing and chanting, etc., not choosing a rasa. We see this in Raghunath das babaji's questions to Vijay Kumar and Vrajanath in Jaiva Dharma. This is what we learn from our acharyas.

What point?

You guys think you have it all down, all the quotes, all the histories, all the documents etc. etc.

 

What the heck is there to talk about?

 

You wrote everything that can be found about the subject in your book.

 

You didn't come here to have a discussion because you already presume to have everything there is to know about Prabhupada being a cowboy in your book.

 

What is to discuss?

 

You came here to advertise your book.

 

This verse is not about choosing a parshada.

it's about choosing a rasa.....

 

If you can get your head out of the ground then read it.

 

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 22.161

 

dāsa-sakhā-pitrādi-preyasīra gaṇa

rāga-mārge nija-nija-bhāvera gaṇana

 

 

SYNONYMS

dāsa — servants; sakhā — friends; pitṛ-ādi — parents; preyasīra gaṇa — conjugal lovers; rāga-mārge — on the path of spontaneous loving service; nija-nija — of one's own choice; bhāvera — of the ecstasy; gaṇana — counting.

 

 

TRANSLATION

"Kṛṣṇa has many types of devotees — some are servants, some are friends, some are parents, and some are conjugal lovers. Devotees who are situated in one of these attitudes of spontaneous love according to their choice are considered to be on the path of spontaneous loving service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and they will choose according to their inner nature. gHari proposed that it's "like another Crow and Tal Fruit debate," and here is the exact instance where he is proven correct. At what point did the jiva fall? At what point did choice come into play if we already have an internal swarupa [in seed form]? Here is where the topics become one, or at least interrelated. And if you look closely you will see that it's deeply intertwined with who is guru, and who can become guru or even a sannyasi or brahmana?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What point?

You guys think you have it all down, all the quotes, all the histories, all the documents etc. etc.

 

What the heck is there to talk about?

 

You wrote everything that can be found about the subject in your book.

 

You didn't come here to have a discussion because you already presume to have everything there is to know about Prabhupada being a cowboy in your book.

 

If you say so. You're clearly much sharper than anyone else here. I simply made an announcement. You-all started the discussion.

 

 

 

This verse is not about choosing a parshada.

it's about choosing a rasa.....

Much better verse.

 

 

If you can get your head out of the ground then read it.
Zing! Ouch! Oooh, I'm offended! You really got me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Prabhupada's opinion on Brahma's rasa differs from that of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura because his opinion arises from his bhava. It is not the only point on which Srila Prabhupada differed from Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, but such differences are not based on anarthas.

I don't think so.

 

You are comparing apples and oranges.

Prabhupada is referring to Lord Brahma's sentiments as the creator of the universe who meets with Krsna in this world during one of Krsna's incarnations and shakes his hand.

Lord Brahma in his service position in this world also relishes a rasa with Krsna in his external position serving Krsna as the creator God of the universe.

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is referring to Lord Brahma's internal nature in his siddha rupa in Goloka.

 

 

Brahmā thought thus within himself

 

"By the recollection of kāma-gāyatrī it seems to me that I am the eternal maidservant of Kṛṣṇa."

When Lord Brahma perfected the kama-gayatri mantra he entered samadhi and realized that he was a maidservant of Krsna.

 

 

In the case where he meets Lord Krsna in this world in his service position as Brahma, he relates to Krsna in sakhya-rasa, because it would be otherwise impossible for Lord Brahma in his male form to have conjugal love of Krsna.

 

Rasa with Krsna is not just internally in svarupa-siddhi.

 

Serving Krsna in this world also has it's own rasa and it is not the same rasa as one has in his internal aspect in svarupa-siddhi.

 

That is the my point that seems to be lost on this crowd.

 

Prabhupada experienced rasa with Krsna by preaching his mission all over the world.

That is one thing.

 

He also has a rasa with Krsna in his parshada deha in Goloka and that doesn't necessarily have to be the same rasa as the rasa one feels by serving from the relative plane of material existence.

 

As a jagat-guru, Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa and there would be few that would contest that conclusion.

 

In Goloka?

Well, nobody knows for sure except that he desired initiation into the Gaudiya sampradaya and the kama-gayatri mantra of madhurya-rasa.

 

His guru planted the seed of madhurya-rasa in his heart by giving him the kama-gayatri.

 

That seed produces a particular kind of fruit - conjugal love of Krsna.

 

 

It is called bhakti-lata-bija.

 

It is a seed that is planted in the heart by the guru.

It is not innate or intrinsic to the soul.

 

We choose a guru from a rasa we aspire for and take the seed from him out of choice.

 

It is choice.

It is NOT something that we have no say about and that we have no freedom to choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Srila Narayan Mahraj:

It is sometimes misunderstood that Srila Svami Maharaja was only in sakhya-rasa, and that he cannot give madhurya-rasa. This is not a fact. He came only for spreading the same mission to the world that was brought by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

Srila B.P. Puri Maharaja's discussion in this pamphlet harmonizes this idea:

 

Puri Maharaja replied, “Baba, if your guru is situated in sakhya-rasa, you don't have a problem. But if anyone thinks they have a problem because their guru is in sakhya-rasa rather than madhurya-rasa, then they have a problem!” Srila Puri Maharaja then went on to explain that should any of Prabhupada’s disciples develop greed for gopi-bhava that Prabhupada would make arrangements to facilitate their pursuit.
<o:p></o:p>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fanatics always start yelling "offender, offender" every time somebody disagrees with a sannyasi.

 

disagreeing and insinuating tantric sahajiya are different things all together. You have clearly cultivated a logic wherein your head knows best, in order to maintain such a position in the face of more intelligent and realized arguments, you have to resort to inappropriate remarks, assumptions about others' motivations, and downright crummy logic. (Not to mention name calling, contradicting yourself, distracting jokes, shifting the ground, NOT READING THE TEXT UNDER DISCUSSION, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...