Tripurari Maharaja

[theist 1]

I confess to a certain level of frustration concerning the original question I asked has not been answered in a clear a forthright manner.

 

"What does Tripurari actually teach on gay unions and other topics?"

 

Audarya-lila I believe that you are his initiated diciple, correct? Brahma das handles his sanga newsletter. Yet a simple strsight forward question on gay unions has not been answered? Gay unions being a sanctified relationship in the eyes of God(religion) or the state. It has binding ramifications. I know Prabhupada's position. Why can't I know Tripurari's?

 

Please don't refer me to go ask him in person. I am asking his disciples here.

 

It starts to feel like a case of plausable deniability.

 

Please forgive the frsustration I know is evident in my post. It's just that 4 pages and still no answer.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Theist,

 

The reason I referred you to Swami Tripurari for the answer to your question is because I have never made such an inquiry of him. When I know what he has said on an issue, as his disciple, I represent him. I have not danced around your question at all, but I have tried to reframe it and place it in terms of it's relevance.

 

So in as straight-forward a way as possible I will answer that I have never heard Swami Tripurari speak about gay unions. I think there is one quote from Guru Maharaja on the Galva site that partially addresses your question, but not directly.

 

Regarding other topics - which topics are you interested in his views on?

 

One thing is there, prabhu, and that is that inquiry must be honest and sincere and meant to ascertain the truth - we are seeking a relationship with Krsna. Approaching a sadhu for the purpose of challenging him or for social discourse is not considered relevant inquiry (pariprasna).

 

If you think that you know Srila Prahbupada and how he views issues and that is your measuring stick for all others I would say that may be a problem for you or for anyone who thinks in that fashion. Is the Guru static or dynamic? Look at Srila Prabupada's life and teachings and see how, over time, and according to circumstances his approach and teachings on relative issues changed. Besides that, there is room for differences in the arena of relativity - even between the Guru and disciple.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[Guest guest]

Here is the quote on the Galva site where Maharaja talks about gay relationships. I am not aware of any other words from him on the issue you are interested in:

 

"...my opinion regarding gay and lesbian devotees is that they should be honored in terms of their devotion and spiritual progress. They should cultivate spiritual life from either a celibate status, or in something analogous to a heterosexual monogomous situation. Gay and lesbian people have always been a part of society from Vedic times to our post-modern times. They should be accepted for what they are in terms of their sexual orientation and encouraged like everyone else to pursue spiritual life."

 

Now, I imagine that many people will take this quote in many different ways and think of it's application differently. Honestly, prabhu, if this is really an important question for you I really feel that you should seek to get it answered by Swami Tripurari himself.

 

Your servant,

Audarya-lila dasa

[theist 1]

Audarya, again yes and for the reason you alluded to, people are likely to take that quote in various ways, that is why I sought something more definitive.

 

If things are left hazy then no one should complain that they have been misunderstood.

 

Thanks anyway.

 

Hare Krsna

[stonehearted 0]

theist, Like Aurdrya-lila, I didn't answer the question directly because I've never asked Maharaja about it, either. I've inferred something from my association with him and reading several of his books, articles, etc. Since it seems to be a burning issue for you, and you decline to ask Maharja directly, I suggest that the responsiblity for you frustration is your own. No one here is trying to evade your question; rather, the best person to ask is Swami B. V. Tripurari.

 

I don't see anywhere in his writings that he advocates "sanctifying" gay unions. However, he does suggest that something anlogous to a monogomous relationship, which he implies is a step down from a celibate relationshsip, may be acceptable to some devotees as a reason to treat gay aspirants with the smae kind of respect shown to aspirants who live in a heterosexual relationship without being married. It has long been my feeling (and often my experience) that those who do so see their relationship change. They may eventually become celibate and live together as friends, separate for any of a number of reasons, or move into an ashram situation.

 

We have given you what we have; if you want more you should approach the source. If you were to submit your direct question to the Sanga Web site, my guess is that Brahma would answer much as Audarya has and give you a link to the answer Audarya has just provided. He'll probably also forward you inquiry to Maharaja, who may give the direct answer you seek.

[stonehearted 0]

is yours.

 

theist complained, "If things are left hazy then no one should complain that they have been misunderstood."

 

And if you deliberately leave things hazy, then your complaints that no one will tell you ring hollow.

[stonehearted 0]

Your kind words are very welcome.

 

In fact, all our shastras warn us loudly against criticizing vaishnavas. In the Bhagavatam we see the example of Durvasa's offense against Amabarisha; in Chaitanya-charitamrita we see Gopal Chapala's problems after vilifying Srivas out of envy; in Chaitanya-bhagavat we see that Mahaprabhu declined to give Sachi-devi, His own mother (!), Krishna-prema because she harbored a little resentment for Advaita (his influence was largely instrumental in Vishvambhara's renunciation, and now Nimai was hanging out with Advaita). This is scary territory. Perhaps few here belive they'll be chased by Sudarshan or stricken with leprosy, but missing the real goal of our practice is the real worry anyway.

 

Babhru

[paul108 0]

Babhru prabhu,

 

It is always good to be reminded of the dangers of criticizing vaishnavas, but the trouble I see is finding oneself in the position of offending one vaishnava or another. I'll give an example.

 

When I fairly new to ISKCON, having read a good number of Srila Prabhupada's books, chanted 16 rounds for about 6 months, etc., but only visited two temples for a total of about 20 visits, I met a certain devotee I'll call Krishna dasi in a nearby neighborhood. My wife, our baby, and I moved to a devotee community shortly thereafter, and Krishna dasi also moved there near that time. (We were both independently planning the move at the same time.) Krishna dasi had served under a certain ISKCON sannyasi for several years, (I'll call him Syama maharaj) in a remote part of the world. Note that these are not their real names.

 

My wife and I gradually got to know Krishna dasi, and I felt that she was very strict with her sadhana and very devoted to Srila Prabhupada. At this time I was very naive about the tribulations that ISKCON had been through (murders, child abuse, etc.), and so she told me (a lot) of her personal experience serving under this sannyasi. She said that while she was serving in a remote country, Syama maharaj broke his sannyasi vow with a female devotee who's name I do not know, and then caused her to be murdered. (I do not remember all of the details.) He also tried to have Krishna dasi murdered on at least two occasions, but was not quite 'successful' at it (she suffered fairly severe injuries).

 

Syama maharaj is a prominent ISKCON guru, and Krishna dasi seems to me to be a faithful disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Assuming that one of them is an honest vaishnava, the other must be a terrible offender. I have to either believe Krishna dasi or disbelieve her story. If I'm wrong, then I'm guilty of an offense, and even if I'm right, then I'm also guilty of a lesser offense because both of them, as far as I know, chant 16 rounds, etc.

 

This is just one example. I could come up with others (though not so much affecting me personally), as I expect could many devotees. It's almost like we're forced to commit offenses. What's an aspiring devotee to do when two vaishnavas or groups of vaishnavas have become enemies, and we're drawn into it, often unwillingly?

 

Hare Krishna

[stonehearted 0]

Paul, it looks as though you may have taken Audarya-lila's compliment about sage advice too seriously. /images/graemlins/wink.gif This is an icky situation.

 

Your judgment about who is honest in this situation depends a lot on the nature and depth of your relationship with Krishna dasi. How well do you know her? Are there any indications of emotional problems? (Well, considering what she has apparently been through, I'm not sure that's a good way to approach it. what I'm getting at is whether there could be a "false-memory" problem, which means she would thoroughly believe what she's told you, whether it happened or not.) How are you implicated in offenses, aside from hearing about this man's alleged offenses? Do you discuss other things (positive things, such as the progrees each of you makes by regular practice and good association) as well? Do you ever have to deal with Syama Maharaja in any way?

 

The main thing is to find good association, which is, I assume, why you moved to the devotee community. If you doubt Krishna dasi's story, then I'd advise caution in your association with her. If you don't, then I guess the question is what to do about S. Swami. This is hard to answer in the abstract, made harder by the fact that I don't know you, either. You could avoid offense by not repeating the story in the manner of gossip, but only discussing it with devotees in whom you have considerable confidence and only when there's likely to be some practical result. If you have some doubts, it may be a good idea to discuss them with your spiritual master (was it you who recently told us he had approached Bhaktimarg Swami for initiation?). If you wanted to discuss it further with me (although I'm not sure how I could help), I think we should do so privately. I guess you could ask jndas for my email address.

 

(Has Krishna dasi reported these events to the GBC and whatever their juridical body is? If she has, and they haven't done anything, I don't think that would shock many experienced devotees.)

 

Because ISKCON has had a very open membership policy and often little to no accountability for those at the top, we have more than our share of messes, and it has been hard for the rest of us to completely avoid them.

 

Ain't Kali grand?

 

Your aspiring servant,

Babhru das

[stonehearted 0]

Paul's broader question: What's an aspiring devotee to do when two vaishnavas or groups of vaishnavas have become enemies, and we're drawn into it, often unwillingly?

 

This is also very sticky. We're probably usually drawn into such situations unwillingly. How we respond depends a lot, I think, on our relationships with the devotees (or groups) involved and our own convictions. I have been in such situations several times over the years, and it's just uncomfortable. Each must be dealt with on the basis of the particular situation, but my overriding concern has always to find a way to avoid vaishnava aparadha (ain't always easy, ain't always fun). My conviction is that progressive Krishna consciousness means loving relationships with all to the extent possible, focused on satisfying Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Reading Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita provides models for associating with devotees. If devotees or groups become enemies, I think we can assume Kali's influence somewhere, for which the only cure is constant performance of Krishna nama-sankirtan.

 

I don't know if anyof this helps.

 

Babhru

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

Srimad Bhagavatam has instructed us not to praise or criticize others' nature or activities. It is said also in Sri Chaitanya Bhagavata that one goes to hell by criticizing others. My instruction to you is not to criticize others, but to correct and purify yourself.

 

I am forced to criticize my own disciples and those who have come to me for instruction. I do not understand why you would go out of your way to try to perform such a difficult task.

 

Letter dated Dec. 4, 1931

[theist 1]

Yes good instruction Babhru. Of course that has also been misused. Like with the magnificent 11 who claimed sole proprietorship over the position of acarya. Question them and you were labeled an offender and aparadhi. History shows how that turned out.

 

There is a way to question to have your doubts resolved and then there is gossip and fault finding.

 

Blind following is condemned.

[stonehearted 0]

But nothing, actually. I agree with you absolutely. That's why I raised the question of what the guest intended to accomplish by tring to steer us back to Tripurari Maharaja's imputed deviations. If it's just to trash Maharaja and congratulate ourselves for (in our minds, anyway) remaining more faithful than he, I don't think it would be profitable. If it's to discuss certain ideas and explore why he presents them as he does, or to look for other ways to do so, it may be fruitful to bring them up in that way, pretty much as you did the homosexuality issue.

[theist 1]

I agree.Not about guests posts one way or the other, but in principle. It is a fine line I think. We really have to get in touch with our own intent.

 

Its amazing really. When I try to really analyze what my own motives or intentions are I find that very often, if not most often, I am unclear myself on what motivates any particular action of mine.

 

It gets more frustrating when I find motivations that are in cross purposes with each other within my one mind. What to do then.

 

Basically I have come to believe that i have no good motive but if I can at least fake a good one and restrain as many negative acts as possible I may have a chance.

 

As the srory goes, once Vishnujana Maharaja was asked how he remained in bliss for so many hours while on sankirtana. He answered that he sometimes has to fake it. I took it to mean sometimes we have to force the external to do the right thing in hopes of influencing the internal.

 

Hope I didn't screw that up too bad.

[gHari 0]

O Braveheart Stoneheart,

 

That wonderful quote by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami was so perfect on this his appearance celebration. If I had a printer I would tape the quote to my monitor. Instead, I will try to place it in my heart in a place that won't get clouded over too soon.

 

 

<center><table width="95%"><TD width="30%" align="center" valign="center"><img src=http://home.primus.ca/~caitanya/SrilaBhaktisiddhanta.jpg></TD><TD width="70%" align="center" valign="center">"<font color="blue">Srimad Bhagavatam has instructed us not to praise or criticize others' nature or activities. It is said also in Sri Chaitanya Bhagavata that one goes to hell by criticizing others. My instruction to you is not to criticize others, but to correct and purify yourself.

 

I am forced to criticize my own disciples and those who have come to me for instruction. I do not understand why you would go out of your way to try to perform such a difficult task.</font color>"

 

--- Srila Bhaktisiddhanta </TD></TABLE></center>

gHari

[stonehearted 0]

we're gonna end up with a hugfest here!

 

theist: We really have to get in touch with our own intent.

Its amazing really. When I try to really analyze what my own motives or intentions are I find that very often, if not most often, I am unclear myself on what motivates any particular action of mine.

 

Yes. This is where introspection comes in. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta often exorts us to become more introspective. When I was a brahmachari long ago, Goursundar did the same. I believe this is part of what Srila Prabhupada had in mind when he write that each of us should become independently thoughtful. Now I see Tripurari Maharaja preaching in the same vein. I have found that introspective writing can help. This is approached in a number of ways, but I think it's important if we really want to make spiritual progress.

 

I like your Vishnujana story and the point you make with it. I don't think you screwed it up at all.

 

Mahalo,

Babhru

[stonehearted 0]

gHari: That wonderful quote by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami was so perfect on this his appearance celebration. If I had a printer I would tape the quote to my monitor. Instead, I will try to place it in my heart in a place that won't get clouded over too soon.

 

Thank you so much for your kind words. I'll follow your lead. I thought it would be just appropriate. And thank even more for creating something beautiful with that quotation. My heart leapt as I scrolled down and saw your post. Thank you, thank you!

[paul108 0]

Babhru prabhu,

 

I'm reluctant to give much more information about the devotees involved in that dispute, because it would not be difficult to figure out the identity of the sannyasi, who is rather popular, and I don't think it would be wise for me to come out with that now. The female devotee has some behavioral peculiarities resulting at least in part from head injuries she incurred during attacks. (She showed me a letter from her doctor attesting to this.) I don't think she could have concocted the story.

 

Part of what makes it a difficult situation is that I know several of this sannyasi's disciples, and I feel like there's a big hammer pounding in my mind when I see him... Again, I'm feeling awkward about saying too much, which I may have already done.

 

I think the matter was brought to the GBC several years ago, and nothing was done. I think the incidents happened in the early- to mid-80's. I don't see Krishna dasi any more, as she has understandably sought association in the other branches of Lord Caitanya's movement. She was also abused serving under Kirtanananda Swami and suffers from considerable physical and mental handicaps on account of the abuse inflicted by these two sannyasis. Yet she remains as an extrordinary example in my mind of dedication to Srila Prabhupada. The Srimad Bhagavatam set I read was given to me by her, a very nice gift.

 

Probably the only solution will be to write to Bhaktimarga Swami about it, but I'm not sure if I'm ready to do that yet. That's a lot of karma to unload when I'm not even officially aspiring yet. (Gotta follow them GBC rules...) Anyway, it's late, and I should shut up already.

 

Hare Krishna

Paul

[stonehearted 0]

I certainly understand why you would say no more, especially here. If you want to discuss it with me privately, perhaps jndas could give you my email address. If you don't feel it's appropriate, I have no complaint whatsoever. I sure don't have anything to gain, except the outside possibility that I may be able to help.

 

Babhru

[theist 1]

Paul If its Mdd that you speak of she has already publicly come out with the story some years back on VNN. I don't know if they have it archived or not. It may have been on their forum which is now defunct.

 

Hare Krsna

[stonehearted 0]

I think Paul's decision not to discuss particulars, especially in public, is a wise one. Since none of us is in a position to judge the truth of either side, and, more to the point, since none of us is in a position to do anything about it, I don't know what good would come of taking this any further. That's just my opinion.

 

Babhru

[theist 1]

I agree. I just wanted to point Paul to some info. that may be of use to him. Nothing really surprises me along these lines. That is why we are encouraged to place our faith in the Supreme Person as opposed to organizations and their members "in good standing".

 

I find knowing that is enough.

[stonehearted 0]

All he needs to do is to search using "Krishna dasi's" name or "Syama Swami's" name. He should be able to find the articles if he thinks that would be useful.

[paul108 0]

Well, I guess I'm a little late. I haven't paid much attention to VNN for a while. She told me about these adventures back in '97-98. It was basically identical to what she'd written, except that some stuff was left out of the articles. I think she mentioned that she wasn't disclosing everything. I know she's an unusual character, but I was always impressed with her dedication and sincerity. This is coming up now because my wife and I are looking to buy a house in the vicinity of Gita-nagari.

 

Hare Krishna

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

If you remember, Theist, 'Krishna dasi' said on VNN that she has recieved brain injuries before coming to ISKCON and had been recieving a government pension because of her problems. The 'new story' of S. Swami having a woman killed because of having or wanting to have sex with her is new; to my knowledge there was one SP female disciple there who was machettied to death by government thug/solider in Africa (here name I will not sully by mentioning it here).

 

Some people are damaged and begin to believe thier own stories...still the danger of condemning someone who just may be totally innocent.