Tripurari Maharaja

[theist 1]

Thanks JNdas

 

Audarya-lila, What nudge? What do you mean?

 

On genetics. There was ONE investigator who claimed he found a 'gay' gene some years ago. Of course the fact that he was a homosexual activist I am sure had nothing to do with the discovery even though no other scientist corraborated his findings.

 

It does raise a question I have been trying to answer on a layman's level. How the subtle body affects(if it does) the specific formations of DNA. It came up on another board in a talk on reincarnation. I couldn't give a good answer.

 

The topic on what is initiation is a topic unto itself. No matter how it is defined I certainly don't qualify but it is an interesting subject. I do think however there might be an added responsibility on those that are to speak up against these assaults on their Guru's life work. Sometimes the silence is deafening.

 

Hare Krsna

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

His point was really about sitting on the sidelines and critiquing everyone while not making a commitment oneself.

 

 

This illustrates my point nicely. You assume that theist is not committed. This implies that he has no right to question others while "sitting on the sidelines". On what basis do you come to this conclusion? Simply because Theist says something out of humility you want to judge him based on it? Congratulations to you on getting your initiation certificate. I wonder how many you have? Personally I won't hold those certificates of any more importance over Theist's dedication to Srila Prabhupada's teachings.

 

As far as discussing guru-tattva with you, I'm really not interested and it is off topic anyway. If you think Srila Prabhupada's and other liberated souls initiation of devotees is only valid for this one life, I don't have much to say.

 

Narottama Das says "cakhu-dan dilo yei janme janme prabhu sei divya jnan hride prokashito"

 

Initiation is the planting of divya-jnamam in the heart. One who has received initiation from the sat-guru is a disciple life after life.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

As far as claims on the Galva site, I am not sure your correct in what your saying. Since I haven't read all the articles I really can't say, but I didn't see any claims that sinful activity was anything but sinful.

 

 

Which is why I feel no need to reply, and which is a good reason for you to withhold your comment until you read the material in question.

 

You haven't read the material but, you are "not sure your correct in what your saying"... Quite an irrelevant comment since you haven't read the material.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

The following is GALVA's view on homosexual activity (originally posted by Nine9, a disciple of Tripurari Maharaja):

 

 

First of all adhorata, or anal sex, is not recommended for any of the three genders, including people of the third sex. Verses condemning its practice cannot be assumed to be condemning all homosexual behavior and love-making. Nowadays it is quite common for straight people to identtify homosexual behavior as being primarily anal intercourse, but this is simply not true. According to the Kama Shastra, oral sex is the natural practice of the third gender and not adhorata.

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

jndas wrote: And if someone questions any of this, the answer is, "If you're serious you will go get initiated first. Get your initiation certificate like me."

 

Maybe Theist was initiated last life. Or do we need to accept a new eternal spiritual master who is guru life after life every time we take birth? Maybe bhakti isn't eternal, and maybe our devotional progress does not continue into our next birth. Maybe the spiritual master has no capacity to protect and guide us after he dies. Or maybe he cannot trace us out after we are born again.

 

bob: Are you serious? First, did you think I referred to Mahaprabhu's instructions to Sanatan as an ad hominem attack on theist? You may do well to go back and check the context. In order to smoothe things over, I expressed some appreciation for his dedication, opining that his (?) service must certainly please his guru. He replied that he hadn't accepted initiation, and, aware that he had been associating with devotees for a long time, I mentioned the importance of commitment, according to Lord Chaitanya. It wasn't a put-down; it was meant to encourage him to continue to make progress. I was also a little embarrassed that I brought the subject up in public, because I remembered that he had mentioned some time ago that he hadn't taken initiation. I apologize for bringing this up. And don't you find it just a little ironic that you chide me for repeating the truth after what you and others have written here over the past couple of days?

 

And as for your later speculation, I'm rather surprised that, while adamantly asserting that we not deviate from even Srila Prabhupada's purports, you introduce speculation that directly contradicts the Lord's explicit instruction in how to advance in devotional service, a process that the acharyas, including Bhaktivinoda Thakur, have warned cannot be circumvented.

 

Can you show us where in the scriptures we can be complacent with a supposition that we may have connected with guru in a past life and so have no need to do so again? Yes, the connection is eternal; still, we cannot understand in what forms the guru comes to us in subsequent lives. And the necessity for following the process given by Mahaprabhu step by step remains. I'm told that there's an idea among gurukulis that initiation is not necessary. That's certainly true for those who have no interest in spiritual progress. Otherwise, all our acharyas, beginning with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, set an example of following the process prescribed by the Lord. If theist hasn't yet found someone who inspires him with the complete faith enjoined in the upanishads, then he's simply being honest in reserving such commitment, and I commend him for it.

 

And you-all dare to wonder what Tripurari Maharaja is thinking?

[Guest guest]

I too feel that Stonehearted was trying to bully or silence Theist with the old "You're not initiated, you're not commited" line. I've met many devotees who are extremely committed to Srila Prabhupada and his teachings, who are in the same position as Theist Prabhu. My advice, Stonehearted, is you are always so quick to criticize others wordings as you like to explain that you are a professor of rhetoric. Perhaps it is time for you to look into your own words, and consider them first. You knew full well what you were doing.

 

And kudos to Theist, JNDas, and Atma for defending Srila Prabhupada's statements on homosex.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

And as for your later speculation, I'm rather surprised that, while adamantly asserting that we not deviate from even Srila Prabhupada's purports, you introduce speculation that directly contradicts the Lord's explicit instruction in how to advance in devotional service, a process that the acharyas, including Bhaktivinoda Thakur, have warned cannot be circumvented.

 

 

Please reread my post. Perhaps you are confused as to what I said. Nowhere did I say one does not need to take initiation.

 

When judging others, we should take a humble position of what they may be, not conclude that they are not initiated therefore not committed as someone else said. None of us know who is theist or anyone else. What sukriti they have performed in previous lives, what samskaras they have undergone, etc. To judge someone based on their visible externals and their own humility is wrong. To say that someone is not committed and not serious simply because they have not been "initiated" is wrong. In light of that, I stated the hypothetical possibilities. We do not know anyone's past lives and their position in devotion is not measureable to us. Thus who can make a judgement that theist or anyone else is not committed simply because they are not initiated. From our own angle, we must see the possibility that others are more advanced than us despite our certificates and rituals. And those other devotees will see themselves as noncommitted and fallen due to their humility.

 

What we have here is the opposite. I have a certificate of discipleship, whereas someone else doesn't. He is not committed and taking pot shots from the "sideline". When he becomes more serious, he will actually take initiation. And for those who already took initiation, three or four times... the more certificates the better.

 

Wasn't it Satyaraja who always said (in jest) how he had four initiations and therefore much more qualified than any brahmin in India.

 

As far as Narottama Das' view, it is clear. Initiation (divya jnanam) exists life after life. The guru may manifest in many ways and through many people, but he is not limited to the rituals of a ceremony. Simply because theist or others have not undergone a particular ceremony, they are considered uninitiated by some.

 

Srila Prabhupada's own view is that by reading his books one may become initiated. As vaisnavas we should take that into consideration before judging someone else's committment. Do we really know who is serious and sincere? Who is "qualified" to offer their views on a topic?

 

 

Can you show us where in the scriptures we can be complacent with a supposition that we may have connected with guru in a past life and so have no need to do so again?

 

 

I'm not really interested in finding such statements in the scriptures, since I never said what you wrote above.

 

 

Yes, the connection is eternal; still, we cannot understand in what forms the guru comes to us in subsequent lives.

 

 

Yes, and the guru is never limited to a ritualistic ceremony. The guru does not need to reestablish his connection with the disciple through a ceremony, the connection is eternal directly through the heart.

 

 

I'm told that there's an idea among gurukulis that initiation is not necessary.

 

 

Sri Chaitanya's instruction is "adau gurvashraya", in the beginning take shelter of a spiritual master. Maybe Srila Prabhupada is competant to deliver and protect theist if he sincerely follows his instructions. That is the choice of Srila Prabhupada. I won't make that judgement for him.

 

If someone finds a saint, then by all means surrender to him and receive guidance. If he is qualified he may plant transcendental knoweldge within your heart. If he isn't qualified, you have another certificate for your wall.

 

 

That's certainly true for those who have no interest in spiritual progress. Otherwise, all our acharyas, beginning with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, set an example of following the process prescribed by the Lord.

 

 

Yet many acharya's became disciples of gurus who left the world before they were born. Others never physically saw their spiritual master. Others saw, but never underwent a ritual of initiation. To say there is a particular "standard" given by Chaitanya that we must follow is naive. Divinity can flow freely according to the Lord's desire. Sometimes it flows crooked, sometimes straight.

 

 

If theist hasn't yet found someone who inspires him with the complete faith enjoined in the upanishads, then he's simply being honest in reserving such commitment, and I commend him for it.

 

 

I believe Srila Prabhupada inspires him with complete faith. That's enough for me to respect him as a devotee and disciple.

 

 

And you-all dare to wonder what Tripurari Maharaja is thinking?

 

 

Actually it was theist who asked the question about what Tripurari Maharaja was thinking. I hope the you-all only refers to my lowly self and not him. How dare he wonder what Tripurari Maharaja is thinking. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[stonehearted 0]

my brave, anonymous master. You're mistaken. If you weren't, I'd admit it and apologize to theist. I'm not afraid to do so; I've done it many times here. If I have a shadow of a good quality, it's that I'm pretty honest. In fact, I've admitted the fault that was there (a slip of memory accompanied by a hard heart). Jahanava-Nitai says he believes that theist has full faith in Srila Prabhupada, and agree with him. I don't think I've ever questioned that. I believe that the connection with the spiritual master is arranged by Krishna, as in Dhruva's case. I have no interest in pushing anyone into such a commitment artificially. I know many long-time devotees who haven't taken initiation, my own daughters and many of my former gurukula students among them. They're all inspired by Srila Prabhupada, and I respect that. I see their commitment to Krishna consciousness in so many ways and am often humbled by it. Initiation is heart business, and I have no desire to interfere in that where I'm not asked.

 

theist replied to that part of my post with candor and humility, which jogged my memory. Because of his honesty and humility, I felt embarrassed that I had brought it up. Although I don't always agree with theist (he's more politically conservatice than I in some departments), and I occasionally find myself wondering what the heck he could be thinking, my overall impression is that he's probably someone I'd be happy to meet face to face. He's obviously intelligent, and I like his signature line: take the essence. It shows he's interested in the good stuff. I'd bet that I'd feel the same about many of those participating here, although I don't doubt that most of the gentle souls here would find my company annoying.

 

Alhough I don't mean to distract us from my faults, which has become the new thread here, I think I should point out somthing missing in jn's presentation of Mahaprabhu's instructions to Sanatana on the process of devotional service, something we have faith Jahanava-Nitai knows very well, as learned as he is. He says it's "adau gurvasrayam," as if that were it. "Adau" means first. First, take shelter of the spiritual master. In Sanatana-siksa, He says, "guru-padasraya, diksa, gurura sevana, sad-dharma-siksa-prccha, sadhu-marganugamana: Take shelter of the spiritual master, accept initiation from him, serve him, hear his iinstructions on devotional service and inquire from him, and follow in the footsteps of the previous acharyas." And he continues, building on that base.

 

But back to my faults, I certainly never meant to imply that I'm more advanced than theist because he hadn't accepted initiation, nor that he lacked commitment to Krishna consciousness. All I know of him is what I see here, which is not enough. But what I see is a strong commitment to understanding the teachings of Lord Chaitanya and a desire for the company of devotees. Jeez, he spends his time here rather than watching "McGyver" reruns. In fact, I'm rather uncomfortable with the "senior devotee" treatment I get, even here in the middle of the ocean where there's no ISKCON center. But devotees are, like Nityananda Prabhu, guna-grahi; they only see the good qualities. In my case, there are no good qualities, only good fortune. And I'm more aware than anyone of the causeless nature of that good fortune.

 

That's not to say I'm not arrogant. I just don't think I would have expressed my arrogance in this way, especially in public, given my own discomfort with hierarchies and external judgment. It probably was expressed in my mentioning my interest in the way we conduct our discourse among ourselves, perhaps meant to remind the unwashed that I have a little education and teach for a living (and, when I think of it in that light, really embarrassing). (And thanks for pointing that out to us.) And yes, when I do screw up and write something nasty, I realize it shows my hypocrisy, and I apologize when it's pointed out (usually before, actually). So feel free to rip me for those faults prominent in my character, because there's certainly plenty of room for that. But get it right.

 

And here's the lack of commitment I have derided before: anomynous sniping at participants. The anonymity encouraged by inviting unregistered interlocutors' contributions also encourages some to take pot shots without any accountability. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Be bold enough to come out of the shadows and take a fake name, like the rest of us. Or at least sign your name as Mahaksha and Audarya-lila do. Have at least that much conviction in your posts.

 

Your aspiring servant,

Babhru

 

[atma 0]

With all due respect to you, I also felt you were trying to silence Theist with your comment about him not being iniciated. I also feel that you're trying to put down JNdas because he is a second generation devotee and you're trying to be sarcastic with him.

 

Just my impressions.

[Guest guest]

Theist,

 

The nudge I was referring to was to speak some Krsna katha rather than continue with this topic. I appreciate the advice (yet here I am again!). - Still the topics I am interested in here are certainly relevant - Krsna consciousness - what it is and what it isn't - diksha - ceremony and certificate or passing on of divine knowledge and a genuine connection.

 

JNDAS - Please read a little more carefully. I said that Theist or anyone may have very good and relevant points and that dismissing them because of their formal status is simply foolishness. I also said that a serious sadhaka will definitely desire and hanker for a spiritual master under whose tutelage he/she can make progress.

 

I find your presentation on Guru tattva to be disingenuous at best. We can all be inspired by the writings of past acharyas and we all are connected to them through their divine instructions as much as we are inspired to take them up (including of course the instruction to take diksha!). Diksha is not about getting a certificate or becoming a card carrying member of a fraternal club. Serious students will feel the need to find a guide and pray deeply and sincerely to find such an inspiration in their lives. This is written in all of Srila Prabhupada's books so I don't see how you can take exception to this standard. Babhru is certainly correct in saying that one should never take initiation whimsically or as a matter of formality. I don't know Theist,s position or yours for that matter and I certainly do not question your sincerity. Nonetheless, it is very clear that in order to make tangible spiritual progress each of us will need to find good association and each of us will need to find someone capable of guiding us on a personal level - with personal inquiry relevant to our particular life situation.

 

You'll note that while Srila Prabhupada said that after his first meeting with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta he was substantially initiated, he later took formal diksha from him. If this was a mere formality, why do so? Diksha is a two way street - from qualified master to qualified student. It is about genuine and formal acceptance. Like when two people are joined in marriage, they are already substantially joined prior to taking vows but still they go through the formality of a ceremony. Most people that I know would disagree that the ceremony of marriage is a mere formality anyway. It is not only a public declaration of commitment but also a heartfelt internal commitment before God and man with regards to the couples intentions.

 

Sridhara Maharaja has described the scriptures and books of our acharyas as the passive principle of Sri Guru and the person Bhagavata as the active principle. For advanced sadhakas they may have the internal connection, but this is very rare. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta always asked people who claimed to be Krsna bhaktas through whom their devotion went to Bhagavan Sri Krsna. He didn't beat around the bush about this issue. When someone said my devotion goes directly to Krsna he would later comment about their lack of sincerity. Unless one can take direct instruction from Sri Guru in the heart (again, this is VERY rare) then one will need to hear from Sri Guru in the form of the person Bhagavata.

 

It behooves all of us to find shelter at an advanced devotees feet. Without this our progress will be very difficult.

 

When asked about who will get a Guru Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said that it is certain that one who is sincere will get one. According to the degree of our inner necessity and sincerity of purpose Krsna will reciprocate and he has agreed to present himself to such sincere seekers as Sri Guru.

 

The fact that there are insicere students and teachers does not give us liscence to make up a new system. There will always be those who are cheaters. The fact remains though that as much as there are counterfeiters and cheaters there are genuine devotees.

 

Another thing that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said was that we should pray sincerely and deeply to find a suitable spiritual master. If after examing so many people and praying for a long time we are not successful in finding a guide he has further said that we should carefully examine ourselves and our own inner necessity and sincerity of purpose.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[stonehearted 0]

Your impressions apparently are that little respect is due (no argument there) and reflect my insensitivity and some carelessness in my writing, which are fault enough. But with all due respect, I have to say that you appear to have misread my character. I don't think I've ever tried to silence anyone here. My habit is to elicit further conversation, but more deliberate conversation (which makes it all the more embarrassing when I stray myself). Moreover, the kind of hierarchical ranking you accuse me of is contrary to my character. I did not mean anywhere to imply that theist isn't a sincere follower. He has certainly been part of Mahaprabhu's movement for more than this one life. I think we have ample evidence of that. As far as the rest goes, I've admitted it's not my business. The one thing I'd never put jn down for is that he's a "second-generation" devotee (as if we were first--this movement is older than time, and it's not all about you and me). I'm not at all above sarcasm, as you all know. But that would not be a target. I'm an old gurukula teacher and headmaster (never been sued!), and a great many of my friends are what some refer to as "second-generation" devotees, both children of devotees and those who joined after he opportunity to take initiation from Srila Prabhupada had passed. (Sorry, but I just have to go after that "second generation" thing. Aren't I the second generation from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, the fourth from Bhaktivinoda Thakura. Yes, I know what you mean, but it reflects a very narrow, shallow view of our movement that bothers me, that may even be offensive.) I don't relate to them in that way, and I often dissent from the fervor with which some of my Godbrothers insist on a certain respect by virtue of that "certificate." I see it even here on the Big Island, for cryiing out loud! For the record, I'm awed by jn's immersion in devotional service and his scholarship. I'm just a working slob, and he does so much for so many (including us), and I hope I'll eventually be able to wean myself from the comforts of family life and move back to where I once belonged--24-hour engagement in distributing the highest good. Sometimes his self assurance strikes me as cockiness, but when I feel that, I always have to suspect my envy of his youth and good fortune. If some carelessness in my posts gave you a different impression, I apologize for that. My faults are legion, and we've often discussed the problems inherent in communicating this way.

 

And thanks for logging in before you clobbered me. (Honest--no sarcasm. Is there an emoticon for that?)

 

[atma 0]

I just came back home and I saw yours two latest posts. I didn't see the one above mine before because I posted it and left to do some errands.

 

If I misread your character I apologize, I told you what I wrote above were my impresions. You know English is not my language and many times I misunderstand what others have to say.

 

I have to go again, busy Saturday.

 

Hope this find you well along with your family.

 

Your servant

 

Gauri dd

 

[stonehearted 0]

As I said, I have lots to criticize, and I make many of my faults very apparent. So there's plenty of fun for others to have at my expense. Without being too defensive, I do think these two things you metioned were mistaken.

 

I was about to make fun of my "English professor" persona by chiding you for your misspelling. Then I remembered that English isn't your first language and thought this would be too easy to misunderstand. English is my first language, and I teach it (writing, no less!), and many times I nevertheless fail to say clearly what I mean. Others may not buy that, but it's the truth. I spend a lot of time apologizing for the things I write online.

 

This thread seems to have become about me, which is a real shame. I'm ready for us to take theist's advice and get to some Krishna-katha. Besides, the other thread, where folks were saying nice things about me (although perhaps sarcastically) was more fun (but not as purifying). At least people are criticising me, not Maharaj.

 

We have a busy Saturday, too. I'd better get to it.

 

Babhru

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

For advanced sadhakas they may have the internal connection, but this is very rare.

 

 

That was my only point. And since such a possibility is there, everyone connected sincerely to devotional service and to the teachings of the guru should be respected as though they are initiated.

 

The sciptures advise us to treat the guest as God simply because the histories speak of God arriving unanounced in the guise of a guest. One treats all guests as God so that in the unlikely case that God actually does appear as a guest we have rendered proper service.

 

In the same manner, we should respect all sincere devotees regardless of whether they have undergone the formal ritual of initiation, as the possibility is there that they may have a direct internal connection. This is certainly the exception to the rule, but it does exist.

 

As Theist has quoted in the other thread, Prabhupada's view is:

 

 

Regarding the disciplic succession coming from Arjuna, disciplic succession does not always mean that one has to be initiated officially. Disciplic succession means to accept the disciplic conclusion.

 

 

That is the view I hold and have presented here. The general rule is that one will undergo the ritual of initiation, but exceptions will always be there, and as such we should respect others assuming the exception exists. Of course if someone is their guru or spiritual guide, then the relationship will be different, one of teacher and student. The rest of us should accept them as initiated into the conclusion of the disciplic succession. They are not on the sidelines, nor are they uncommitted in my view. They are right there in the middle of the Kurukshetra battle fighting for the Pandavas.

 

We've discussed the issue of initiation before and the threads just run on forever. I agree with much of what you said. My main contention is that initiation is not the ceremony. It is the transmission of divya jnanam. This can take the form of a formal ceremony or it may not. The Vaishnava tradition has many examples of both, and both are valid forms of initiation. To say only the ritual is valid disregards the history of Vaishnava traditions. I'm more open to not limiting divine grace. It will flow as it desires.

[stonehearted 0]

It looks as though there's little if any disagreement here. I apologize to all for inadvertently bringing this up and for the misunderstanding it caused.

[paul108 0]

Audarya-lila prabhu,

 

What is fanatic about taking the spiritual master's words as truth? And what do you mean by "the truth of reason and sense perception?" Do you think we can find out truth by reason (a.k.a. philosophical speculation) or by sense perception (materialism)? According to my understanding, the result of reason is that there is no absolute truth as there appears to be no absolute opinion; and sense perception leads to atheism.

 

It's funny that you mention tattva sandarbha. I was reading it a month ago, but I took a break for some easier reading. Maybe it's time to pick it up again. It's funny because I had been remembering what I read in it when I was composing the message that you apparently replied to with the words "You have to reconcile all truths and, of course, sastric evidence takes precedence - but we are not to deny other valid sources of truth." Right now I'm looking at Anuccheda 10, which is translated here as "Consequently, for us who are inquisitive about that which is beyond everything, yet the support of everything -- which is most inconceivable and wondrous in nature -- direct perception, inference, and so on are not suitable means of gaining knowledge. For this purpose the only suitable means is the _Vedas_, the transcendental words that are existing without beginning. They are the source of all mundane and spiritual knowledge and have been passed down in _parampara_." I don't know how this reads to you, but it appears to me to directly contradict your comment to me.

 

As for reconciling relative truths -- the truths that we see in the material world -- I find mahamaya to be incomprehensibly bewildering and I consider the world as it appears to my senses to be the product of imperfect senses, illusion, mistakes, and cheating. One thing I was taught in my first bhagavad-gita class, which I hope to never forget, was that sense perception and philosophy are of no help whatsoever in arriving at spiritual knowledge. They only perpetuate material life. The only way to learn about actual spiritual life is by Krishna's mercy, which comes in the form of the spiritual master speaking Vedic knowledge.

 

Hare Krishna

 

p.s. Since the topic of the necessity of accepting a spiritual master has come up, I'll volunteer my position. Krishna told me to accept a spiritual master, and I replied that having seen the perfection in Bhagavad-gita As It Is, I was unable to accept anyone other than Srila Prabhupada. However, as he was no longer available for giving diksa, I would not be able to accept anyone. I have since realized that this was immature understanding.

Four years ago I asked Bhaktimarga Swami about diksa, and told him that I wanted to receive harinama diksa but I could not understand how a conditioned soul could take the required vows. Philosophically, it seemed to be cheating, because mahamaya is so powerful that anyone can fall from their vows. There are many practical examples. Bhaktimarga Swami recommended that I wait some 25 years before getting diksa, because then I could be more certain. About 7 weeks ago I decided that enough is enough, and if it requires cheating to get Krishna, I am going to cheat. Of course, if I do actually keep the vows (and I will try my best!) then it's almost not cheating. I pray that I can keep the vows, but I do not know. I have been bewildered so many times, but I cannot go on like this. I must remember Krishna. So I wrote to Bhaktimarga Swami, and he replied that we can proceed with the steps to prepare for harinama. All of you, I pray for your blessings.

 

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

Dear Paul,

 

I hope that you will progress nicely in devotional service under the care and guidance of Bhati Marg Swami. One nice comment that Sridhara Maharaja has made regarding spiritual life is 'nothing risked, nothing gained - all risk, all gain'. We have to give of ourselves and make tangible steps each day to surrender more and more.

 

Regarding the Tattva-sandarbha of Jiva Goswami and my comment to you. If you look back at your post which I was responding to you will see that the example you gave was a material example. There are relative truths and then there is the absolute truth. The color of the sun is not beyond sense perception or experimentation to ascertain. If you look more closely at the text you will see that Jiva Goswami does indeed mention prakyaksha and anuman as valid sources of gaining knowledge. Of course, as you mentioned and cited the pramana for, sense perception and logic and reason will not be very helpful for gaining knowledge of that which lies beyond their purview.

 

At any rate we should try to reconcile all sources of evidence . We are in pursuit of spiritual knowledge and in that sense certainly logic and reason as well as sense perception take a back seat but they are not invalid. What I find fanatical is for example, someone saying that the earth was created only serveral thousand years ago because they take a literal view of all that is stated in the bible. This type of mentality is definitely not conducive to progressive devotional life. There is plenty of physical evidence that proves beyond a doubt that this idea of creation is not factual and insisting upon it makes one and one's faith look foolish. Don't think that Gaudiya Vaishnavism doesn't suffer from the same type of narrow mindedness from some of it's adherents and, in my opinion at least, it makes our tradition and it's adherents look foolish when this type of mentality is prevelant and held by large numbers of 'followers'.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[paul108 0]

Audarya-lila prabhu,

 

Thank you for your reply and your blessings. As you pointed out, the example I gave was not a very good one. I should have given an actual historical example. Here's one: Srila Prabhupada said that living entities inhabit the Sun and the Moon, yet hardly anyone outside the devotee community would accept those statements as true. So here we have contradiction between the words of the spiritual master and widely accepted empirical knowledge. Of course the easiest thing to do would be to not mention this to people, and to even delete mention of it from recorded conversations, books, etc., but this seems to be an offense. We think we know things better than our spiritual master, and we are embarassed by his teachings.

 

I would consider your example using the Bible to be somewhat different. The problem I see is that the Bible does not appear to be anywhere near the level of purity of scriptures such as the Srimad Bhagavatam, nor does it appear to be delivered by pure devotees in any parampara. That the Bible has been changed many times is well known.

 

I am also frustrated when people argue against creationism by pointing to evidence of a relatively ancient Earth, as if there was no other story of creation. However, the problem that taints the Bible is the same strength that supports the Vaishnava scriptures and parampara. Having been given cintamani in the form of pure scriptures delivered by a pure devotee of Krishna, I believe it is our responsibility to carry them to others with the same purity.

 

Hare Krishna

Paul

[Guest guest]

Hari Bol Paul,

 

In the new example you offer you suggest that these ideas would need to be hidden or the scriptures re-written so that no contradiction will be seen. I disagree. Have you read any of Sadaputa's work? The fact that scientists have gone to the moon and not discovered any life as we experience it and that the sun is uninhabitable by our current estimation doesn't mean that the scriptures are incorrect or that they need revising. Life in higher realms is of a different nature. Just like there is mention of Demigods coming to earth - but they are only seen if they choose to be seen. Bhagavad-Gita enforms us that there is a subtle body and a gross material body. Sadaputa postulates that demigods and those who inhabit higher planets have subtle bodies which are not detectable by our current detection methods.

 

I disagree with you regarding our scriptures. I think there is plenty of information in the overall corpus which really amounts to the best information at the time based on current knowledge and social setting. What are the scriptures afterall? They are the words of saints and sadhus appearing in the world within a certain cultural and historical setting.

 

All for now.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[Vaishnava_das108 1]

To get this thread back on track, we were talking about Tripurari Swami. Also, the issue with Tripurari Swami also goes way beyond a supposed viewpoint on homosexuality, so perhaps we could do well to broaden the discussion into other points?

 

The sum and substance of the 'Tripurari Swami' issue is that he has deviated in MANY ways from his guru maharajas, Srila Prabhupada and Sridhara Maharaja.

 

I have heard the many hokey arguments about preaching according to time and place, etc, and seeking the essence, and this does not compute, sorry.

 

You cannot seek the essence and preach according to the time by disobeying your spiritual masters, and this is what TS has done on MANY issues, not just that of female sannyasa.

[paul108 0]

Audarya-lila prabhu,

 

I've seen enough of Sadaputa's work to be impressed, but not enough to quite grasp it.

 

In the case of life on the Moon and Sun, we can say that somehow or other the life is invisible. There's our imperfect senses at work again. It's just as easy to say that the effects of homosexual behavior, which is condemned in the scriptures, are invisible too. Both things have to be taken from the scriptures as is, on account of our faith in the spiritual master.

 

Regarding the culture and historical setting, I would say that not all cultures and times are equal. Part of Srila Prabhupada's goal in spreading Krishna consciousness around the world was also spreading varnashrama dharma, which he sometimes called sanatana dharma. This is eternal culture, a culture based on cooperative devotional service. In one sense everyone is engaged in Krishna's service, down to the demons in Hell punishing wicked men, and a creative imagination might find a way to think of how homosexuality serves Krishna's purpose, but my mind isn't that creative. I prefer not to think of such things.

 

If I were to make the rules, I'm sure I would do it different on account of my incomplete understanding. I would probably let everyone do what they feel like doing and still remember Krishna. However, I didn't make the rules, and it doesn't seem to work like that. I cannot try to enjoy my senses and keep my mind fixed on Krishna. I often feel like Krishna is behind me, projecting my desires in front of me, and in this way I never get to see Him. Rather than giving people what (they think) they want, whether a man wants another man for a companion, or a woman wants the prestige of the sanyassa ashram, we should be teaching them and ourselves to give Krishna His desires. Then everyone can be happy.

 

Hare Krishna

 

[Vaishnava_das108 1]

I would like to comment Jahnava-Nitai prabhu on his views on initiation.

 

Although I must say that I respect the formal ceremony of diksa and there has to be a certain amount of importance allocated to it, this is the first time that I have heard a viewpoint that striving devotees of any kind may be respected as "initiated" devotees if they simply show or have faith in Srila Prabhupada's teachings.

 

This is probably the spirit of boundless generosity that we should all try to emulate, and was perfectly done by no less that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Himself.

 

All glories! All glories! /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[stonehearted 0]

And I thought we were talking about me.

 

Vaishnava_das108 wrotes: The sum and substance of the 'Tripurari Swami' issue is that he has deviated in MANY ways from his guru maharajas, Srila Prabhupada and Sridhara Maharaja.

 

I would amend that to say that the thread is about the CONTENTION that Tripurari Maharaja has deviated.

 

I wonder what could possibly be gained by such sadhu-ninda. According to the understanding of the ten offenses recited (apparently rather mechanically) in ISKCON centers every morning, a sadhu is someone dedicated to propagating the glories of chanting the holy name. According to my memory of Monier-Williams, "nind" indicates not just blasphemy, but any criticism or ridicule. There's no doubt a very good reason this is the first offense we are enjoined to avoid if our chanting is to bear fruit any time soon. Raghunath Bhatta Gosvami refused to hear any criticism of vaishnavas, even if it appeared justified. He preferred instead to hear what they had done to serve Krishna.

 

I have contended that many of ISKCON's difficulties may likely be traced to the propensity to vilify vaishnavas. The GBC and ISKCON's other leadership criticized Srila Sridhar Maharaj for many years, demanding that anyone who did not repudiate his company be banished from ISKCON. More recently, they have maintained a campaign against Narayan Mahraja, and, although they've tried to cover any trace of it, they ran a campaign of criticism against Gour-Govinda Maharaj. Although ISKCON has some gorgeous projects around the world, built with donations from Indian congregational members, temples across the US languish, maintained by imported indentured labor from India, Eastern Europe, and South America. I'm told that the San Diego temple now has many devotees rom Argentina, sent by Gunagrahi Swami. When I lived there, I would often go to mangal arati or guru-pujas where the Deities outnumbered the devotees present (I've counted). ISKCON has been pummeled by murders, criminal cases, large lawsuits and other high-profile symptoms of this malady. I urge caution in this regard. You're likely to open a can of worms which may yield cases of alleged deviations by many ISKCON gurus, GBC members, and other leaders (oops! Been done!), some of whom may still be in their positions of prestige in the institution. No one will gain from this. I have been in ISKCON for over 33 years, and I have seen many powerful devotees undone by their enthusiasm for "getting" other preachers, even to "save" the movement or to "defend Srla Prabhupada." It's one thing to discuss principles; it's another to launch a crusade against a preacher who has inspired many devotees, old and new, including many ISKCON stalwarts. I can't say it strongly enough: Beware. (And I'll tell you frankly that I'd write the same sermon if you were proposing an examination of the faults of Narayan Maharaja, Sivarama Swami, Narasingha Maharaja, Bhaktitirtha Swami, Hridayananda Maharaj, Atma-tattva prabhu, or anyone else. Beware.)

 

We would all do better to spend this time and energy improving the quality of our own chanting and making plans to preach purely according to our understanding of our spiritual masters' instructions.

 

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

I would rather say that the idea of Daiva Varnashrama that Bhaktivinoda Thakur conceived was an ideal of organizing an international movement to spread Krsna consciousness worldwide. Davia Varnashrama was the form within which to present the essential teachings. It is not that Srila Prabhupada wished to establish varnashrama also. His only motive was to spread Krsna consciousness which is beyond socio-religious conventions of any kind.

 

Illicit sexual behavior of any kind will be harmful to those who engage in such acts - and yes we do take that insight from scripture. We can also take it from modern medicine and practical experience. Sexually transmitted diseases are a real problem for the promiscuous. Athletes are warned to avoid sexual contact before 'the big event'. There are many examples.

 

Sexual acts and promiscuity are not the issue. All I was and am still suggesting is that devotees take current scientific understanding into consideration when dicussing peoples natural inclinations. There are many gays in the KC movement and they are just as dedicated to the principles and philosphy as are the heterosexuals.

 

Homosexuals make up a very small percentage of the overall population and always have. My own experience growing up was that I knew several homosexuals and could identify them long before they became interested in sexual behavior, in other words - in my own experience it was obvious from very early childhood.

 

Given the nature of the hatred and general disgust shown to homosexuals by many individuals I find it particularly unlikely that people would 'choose' to become one. Many people go through incredible trauma in their lives and are ostracized by family and friends alike due their nature.

 

I personally think that those who encourage this type of hatred and disdain of another person based on their pyschology to be tied to their preconceptions and prejudices and incapable of adjusting to new information due to their conditioning.

 

What was really at issue was the presentation of KC according to time, place and circumstance. We are meant to engage all beings in Krsna's service. How will we do so if we repel them and batter them with the 'truth'. A good teacher will teach according to the capacity of the student - that was really the issue that was initially being discussed. At any rate this is really a peripheral issue - a detail if you will - and I agree that we should concern ourselves with becoming Krsna conscious and helping others to do so as well.

 

I suggest that you go back read Swami Tripurari's comments about women and sannyasa again. I saw nowhere where he was suggesting that sannyasa be awarded on the basis of desire for name and fame. Quite the contrary.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[Guest guest]

Babhru,

 

What a wonderful post. I read it over several times. Thank you so much. Sage advice from a true friend.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa