Philosophy

[Guest guest]

Srila Prabhupada on Philosophy

April 12, 1975

 

Ramana Maharshi never preached about Krishna's superexcellent position. This is going on. Everyone is taking advantage of Bhagavad-gita and he's preaching in his own foolish way. "Own way" means foolish way. This is going on. There is no problem if you have your own philosophy, but you cannot take my book and preach it as your philosophy. If you have got your own philosophy, you write your own philosophy. Why do you take advantage of my book and misinterpret it? This is cheating. Because my book is very popular, you take advantage of my book and preach your own nonsense philosophy. This is going on. If you want to smoke ganja, you smoke in your own hand. Why you capture my hand and smoke? What is this? So the ganja-smell will be in my hand, not in your hand. This is going on. Why do they take advantage of Bhagavad-gita and preach their nonsense philosophy? That is our protest. You preach your nonsense philosophy. We have no objection. But don't touch the Bhagavad-gita. This is our Krishna consciousness movement. Do you think it is honest to preach something of your own philosophy and take advantage of my book and mislead others? Is that very good, honest business? This is going on. This is going on, it is a very dangerous position. In our country, and what to speak of other countries, all these swamis, yogis, and politicians, and scholars, they are doing this. It is a very dangerous position. Why should you touch Bhagavad-gita? You speak and preach your own philosophy. There are so many philosophies. But our only objection is that "Why should you preach your nonsense philosophy through Bhagavad-gita?" Do you think it is right?

[maadhav 0]

<< But our only objection is that "Why should you preach your nonsense philosophy through Bhagavad-gita?" >>

 

Some do it becuse:

- they do not have their own authority, so they use Krishna's.

it is like selling garbge with nice covering on it.

 

- They mistaenly think they know what gita/krishna says.

 

- They deliberately misinterpret gita/krisha.

 

<< Do you think it is right? >>

 

No.

HKs are good at challenging them.

Unfortunately, many HKs act hostile to other vedic paths as well.

 

 

[narayanadasa 0]

Jai Sriman Narayana:

 

It is definitely not right to steal and use someone's philosophy, misinterpret it and then preach.

 

But... just something occured to me...

 

There have been so many spiritual proponents in Bharath about Sanatana Dharma and we should be proud about that. But at the same time, these philosophical differences which seems to cause INTELLECTUAL arguments which if done correctly is healthy. But, it appears that sometimes common people tend to abuse each others lineage in a public forum. I think this is serving no purpose and should be avoided, especially in a public forum. This doesnt however stop us from intellectual arguments about the different philosophies which is necessary to learn more.

 

Major philosophies:

 

- Adi Shankaracharya - Advaitha (non-duality) - Some Aacharya's (even outside Advaithins) differentiate between non-duality and monism i.e they dont agree that Shankaracharya was a monist.

- Ramanujacharya - Vishishtadvaitha (qualified non-duality)

- Madhwacharya - Dvaitha (duality)

...

...

- Chaitanya - Achinthya Bhedha Abedha (simultaneous duality and non-duality)

 

Each of them indeed said that whatever they did was applicable to Kali yuga and their philosophy was the ultimate the latest such claim being Lord Chaitanya's philosophy. Note that all of them indeed deserve to be respected.

 

Each of them are Avataras and indeed did what they came to do because one of the properties of the Avataras is to finish the job they came for unlike common human beings where there usually is non-completion.

 

It is only 5000 years of Kali yuga still so not sure how many more such philosophies will come in future quoting the same Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas etc. May be we keep committing old sins in addition to inventing new ones that God needs to send new messages in the form of new Aacharya's and new philosophies because man by nature seems to be rejecting old ones as outdated (out of ignorance may be!).

 

For the common man, does the philosophy really matter? If so how? and are philosophies just different interpretations of the same words of God?

 

Any thoughts?

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

"But, it appears that sometimes common people tend to abuse each others lineage in a public forum."

 

True, it is wrong to blaspheme a bona fide lineage. However, self-proclaimed god-men like Ramana Maharsi have no lineage, have no authority and claim to be self-realised.

 

"Each of them indeed said that whatever they did was applicable to Kali yuga and their philosophy was the ultimate the latest such claim being Lord Chaitanya's philosophy. Note that all of them indeed deserve to be respected."

 

Without a doubt. Let me clear up, the followers of any of the last three sampradayas, plus Vallabha-sampradaya are not to be criticised. Although debate and discussion about the intricacies of their philosophical conclusions can be sought. As for Shankaracharya himself, he should not be criticised for he is Lord Shiva himself partaking in a particular mission. However, if his followers do not accept his conclusions e.g. that Narayana is beyond the material platform or just chant the names of Govinda being the only way to liberation, then we can question their dedication to Shankaracharya's teachings.

 

"It is only 5000 years of Kali yuga still so not sure how many more such philosophies will come in future quoting the same Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Itihasas etc. May be we keep committing old sins in addition to inventing new ones that God needs to send new messages in the form of new Aacharya's and new philosophies because man by nature seems to be rejecting old ones as outdated (out of ignorance may be!)"

 

Any new philosophical wave can only be authorised by one personality: Lord Kalki in 427,000 years. In terms of presenting an existing philosophy in a different way according to time, place and circumstance, an acharya may do so if he is coming in the line of Shankaracharya or the four Vaishnava sampradayas. That is, that the essence of the philosophy should not change, although the presentation of it may be varied.

 

 

"For the common man, does the philosophy really matter? If so how? and are philosophies just different interpretations of the same words of God?"

 

But anyone serious about making spiritual progress cannot be considered a common man. Therefore, it is important that he is given the highest philosophy. Shankacharya's philosophy is both bona fide, but also not to be accepted for those wanting to follow the highest spiritual path because we know from the Padma Purana what Shankaracharya's aim was in terms of his philosophy. As for Madhva, Ramanuja, Chaitanya and Vallabha, their philosophies are same, that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. They differ in terms of the nature of our relationship with Him - but that is ok, because different relationships simultaneously exist in the spiritual world. They are not interpretations, they are siddhanta or truth, based on all the Vedic scriptures, not a selection of a few quotes. The truth is one, but there is variety of expressions of the relationship with that truth in the spiritual world. That does not mean that anyone can concoct their own truth and interpret according to their own whims. All the acharyas mentioned above are coming from bona fide disciplic successions and they do not depart from the teachings of the Vedic scriptures.

 

Your aspiring servant,

******

 

[narayanadasa 0]

Jai Sriman Narayana:

 

But it seems that only after someone appears we look in Puranas if their arrival was predicted. Any predictions of any future Aacharya's for the next 427000 years apart from appearance of Lord Kalki (who is God not an Aacharya)? Basically, after Chaitanya who will appear? Is any information about this available in our scriptures?

[Guest guest]

Philosophy it is, if it is only at the level of perception & feeling incompleteness,.. and no manifested action.

 

BG is a powerful text to put philosphy to an end and actions (its manifestation) right upfront. BG insists on Karma samnyasa for purification of actions, and having no attachements to results or doership of action for the sake of maintaining continued purity of actions.

 

The claim that BG is some 'one' person's philophy shows that there is no importance paid to the Karma samnyasa mentioned so much by krishna. Thus the objective of the remarks by the person here is to limit the benefit of BG to the world by reducing to mere sction-less bakthi, mere philosophy, mere drama of feeling incomplete without krishna.

 

Listen to BG from scholars/swamis who also speak well on other great texts like Asta vakra gita, Viveka choodamani, shiva sutra..etc. And then you will see that BG becomes only more special due to the unique insight gained on the personality Krishna, a name most have heard from childhood.

 

Srila Prabhupada lived a good life and did do good. Let's not bet that these remarks mentioned were from him. He for sure doesn't appear so disturbed for a person visiting ISKON temple today.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

"Basically, after Chaitanya who will appear? Is any information about this available in our scriptures?"

 

As an incarnation of Krishna, Chaitanya is authorised to make prediction. His prediction is that the Hare Krishna mantra will be chanted in every town and every village in a golden age (500 years of it have already expired). So after 9,500 years of spiritual ecstasy, the rest of the Age of Kali will set in with its degradation. At the moment, the only incarnation to come is Kalki.

 

However, the only context for another incarnation will be if a bona fide acharya is given a revelation by the Lord. Often scriptures are written on the inspiration of the Lord. Vyasadeva was empowered by God to compile the Vedas. A bona fide acharya may be empowered by God to write scripture. That is also to be considered bona fide because guru is accepted as representative of God. If such a scripture predicts the advent of God, there may be more to come.

 

One thing is for sure, many great devotees will come. Lord Caitanya predicted that 'his army chief will come and spread the mantra to the four corners of the world'. That prophecy was fulfilled by Prabhupada.

 

Prabhupada has predicted that 'My books will be the lawbooks for the next 10,000 years'. That means that one day a great world leader will accept Krishna Consciousness and apply Prabhupada's teachings in society. It is going to happen - very exciting!

 

Your aspiring servant.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna,

 

Thank you for your intelligent points.

 

"Philosophy it is, if it is only at the level of perception & feeling incompleteness,.. and no manifested action."

 

True. One needs action in God-consciousness.

 

"BG insists on Karma samnyasa for purification of actions, and having no attachements to results or doership of action for the sake of maintaining continued purity of actions."

 

Specifically to give up the results as a sacrifice to God. Now, one can do this in two ways. Either one can do it as a ritual 'I offer this money I have made to you, God'. This is partial progress, it will accrue pious credits but is not true renunciation.

 

Or one can do it with true devotion. Karma (action) with devotional activities becomes bhakti (the karma becomes destroyed by the devotional service) - that is true renunciation.

 

"The claim that BG is some 'one' person's philophy shows that there is no importance paid to the Karma samnyasa mentioned so much by krishna."

 

Bhagavad-Gita contains many stages to eventually reach the same goal, bhakti.

 

"Thus the objective of the remarks by the person here is to limit the benefit of BG to the world by reducing to mere sction-less bakthi, mere philosophy, mere drama of feeling incomplete without krishna."

 

I never said bhakti was action-less. Bhakti is with action, God-conscious action - it could be a job, it could be looking after your family - but God should be at the centre of your motivation (not at the periphery).

 

"Listen to BG from scholars/swamis who also speak well on other great texts like Asta vakra gita, Viveka choodamani, shiva sutra..etc."

 

The Bhagavad-Gita is described as 'the essence of all the Vedas' therefore, one can understand the Vedas through the Bhagavad-gita.

 

Prabhupada did make those comments Ramana Maharsi. The reason? Because he never told people to become devotees of God. Even if you follow the jnana path of the BG, it is specifically regarding knowledge of God's activities, pastimes and form - but he doesn't talk about Krishna's activities. Dhyana - the greatest yogi is one who constantly thinks of Krishna - unfortunately he claims meditation but is not even educating his disciples about Krishna - how can they think of Him always? Karma-yoga: give up the fruits to Krishna. The overwhelming majority of his disciples are educated to think that Krishna's form is material energy. That goes against Krishna's teachings.

 

Your aspiring servant.