Perspectives on the Sarasvata parampara

[Gaurasundara 0]

 

With your solid two years of practicing Krishna consciousness you seem to think a lot of yourself and little of others.

 

 

I remember stating at various times that I began to study Krishna Consciousness since 1998 or so. That makes 5 years. Rack up a casual knowledge of KC since my very birth and you have an additional 27 years, give-or-take. Where did you get the figure 'two' from? I don't think that it is very intelligent to judge somebody's "spiritual advancement" based on how many years they have spent in Krishna Consciousness. A bhakta who has been distributing books on the street for a week can have far more realization than a twice-initiated devotee who seems to be only interested in where his next big meal of prasadam is coming from. Believe me, I've seen it happen.

As for thinking little of others, I don't remember making any statement to that effect. I tend to condemn blind belief in any form, in any philosophy, in any religion, in any sphere I see it, and that includes material spheres too. In this context I don't think it is right for people to blindly believe in something as important as a crucial spiritual concept. The reason is that spiritual life is perhaps the most important asset of all and thus we cannot afford to compromise ourselves in this regard.

 

 

Simply because something doesn't make sense to you does not mean it is illogical or incorrect. Trigonometry doesn't make sense to a child in the first grade. Continue studying with humility and everything will become clear. You are carrying too many misconceptions and you assume you know more than you actually do.

 

 

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable about my level of knowledge considering that I am sure you do not possess any psychic abilities whatsoever. Neither do I believe you are in any position of authority to comment on someone's level of knowledge when you clearly have no idea how much knowledge a person has. In this way, isn't that a little grandiose in itself? How would you know if I am in "first grade" or "fifth grade" or "Post graduate" for that matter? It just seems pretty grandiose to me when somebody comments on other people's learning.

 

 

Undertake a systematic study of the Gita and Bhagavatam, preferably under a sadhu, and things will become clear.

 

 

In fact, I have decided to re-read BG and SB several weeks ago. In fact, I think I will tackle the CC yet again when I finish. As for sadhus, great, where are the sadhus? I am looking for one. As far as I know, the last great accessible sadhu was Srimad Gour Govinda Swami Maharaja. Now that he has left this world, who do I turn to?

Gita and Bhagavatam, ah! Whose translation do I read?

 

See what I mean? It's easy to make a point, but it's not always as easy to come up with straight answers.

[Gaurasundara 0]

 

I was simply reporting the character of your entire group which you claim comprises 90% of Gaudiyas. You were not singled out among that group of poseurs.

 

 

You seem to be pretty sure of my affiliation with a particular Gaudiya sampradaya. Evidently you haven't been paying attention to what I have been saying. I am not affiliated with any branch of Gaudiyas, officially. I take my inspiration and learning from Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON.

Aside from that, it is a fact that there is much more to Gaudiya Vaishnavism than ISKCON and Gaudiya Matha. Say what you like about this, but that does not change the fact. There are also hundred and thousands of Gaudiya Vaishnavas out there as well, who have no connection to Gaudiya Math and ISKCON. I suppose they are all sahajiyas and rascals and no benefit will come from their association?

Poseurs? So now you are insulting Vaishnavas, many of whom you may not personally know?

 

 

However, for presenting such offenses in a public forum like you have done I report that you are indeed much much lower, and that your spiritual life has ended or rather it never began since it has all been mental arrogance and self-aggrandizement since day one. Such offenses are never forgiven by Sri Krsna.

 

 

That's really between Krishna and me, and you are not a middleman to report what is going on. Frankly I feel a sense of relief after speaking my mind. Interestingly, the quality of my chanting also seems to have risen dramatically. This is my experience.

 

 

It is a disgrace that you use that name and sad picture to represent yourself. The sooner Krsna removes it from my sight the better.

 

 

So not do you freely insult Vaishnavas, but now you are starting to insult the name and face of Mahaprabhu Himself?

 

 

I have tasted the pudding and no poseur is going to concoct such lies in my presence. How did they become so arrogant?

 

 

Good for you. I do not know why "they" became arrogant. Who is "they"? Can you please specify who you are addressing or are you simply interested in making blanket condemnations about people who you don't know and haven't bothered to listen to?

[Gaurasundara 0]

Dear Audarya-lilaji, thanks for your points.

 

 

All the mantras that he/she gives to the disciple are available in written form - so if it is just a matter of chanting the correct mantra - that's available for any and all.

 

 

I remember reading somewhere (from a reputable Gaudiya Vaishnava source) that reciting mantras as learned from books will not take effect since the mantra has to be received from the guru. What do you think of that? This is probably also the meaning of the 'sampradaya vihina ye' verse. The mantra has to be passed down by a guru in sampradaya.

[Gaurasundara 0]

Dear Babhruji, thanks for your points.

 

 

Another implication that has been made along the way is that because some (many) in such a parampara aren't initiated by the previsous link, they haven't been properly initiated. Not so. We know, for example, that Bhaktivinoda Thakura was initiated, as was Gaura-kishora. The same holds for all members.

 

 

I don't remember saying anything to that effect, but let me clarify something in these regards. I don't say that none of the Acharyas in the Sarasvata-parampara have not been properly initiated; I am saying that they have not been initiated by each other. After all, I understand that the tradition since the time of Mahaprabhu has been to take diksa into the sampradaya, and to trace respective paramparas according to these diksa connections. It seems that in the Sarasvata-parampara presented by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, not only have the Acharyas listed therein not initiated each other in turn, but some of them never even met each other. If diksa is not important in this siksa-parampara, then how can siksa be important either? How can siksa be "passed" from a guru to a disciple who never met each other?

I am aware that Srila Bhaktivinoda was initiated as was Srila Gaura-kishora. But Srila Bhaktivinoda never initiated Srila Gaura-kisora in any way, did he?

 

Dear Babhruji, I appreciate your points and I admire your ways of speech. I sincerely hope that soemthing fruitful can be born out of this conversation.

[Gaurasundara 0]

Dear Babhruji,

 

I forgot to mention this point. I also wanted to tell Audarya-lilaji in reply to his post, but I think I'll tell you in this post itself.

 

As you may have known, I have spent several days offline due to a disruptive change in ISPs. I decided to use this time to get on with some valuable personal projects. In this connection, I started reading some of Jagatji's old articles that I had almost forgottem about. I found this very interesting quote in the article which I would like your comments upon. What do you think?

 

 

"The worst enemy in the mind of the Gaudiya Math is, not surprisingly, the traditional world of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, because they broke away from this world and are so often forced to defend themselves against the accusation that they do not genuinely represent the Chaitanya Vaishnava tradition. This is the same reason that Iskcon has to worry about the Gaudiya Math, which can always claim that Iskcon does not purely represent the traditions of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati."

 

 

[stonehearted 0]

Madhavananda: A fascinating observation. How has he changed his position, and when?

 

All I meant, Madhava, is that he seems more inclined to accept the acharyas in that parampara than when he left it. I'm not sure just what texts of his gave me that idea; if I had time, I'd try to track them down. Unfortunately, I'm buried with work--papers to grade, committee work, course design, etc. Maybe I can do so later. I certainly don't mean to imply that he has changed his mind in the sense (or to the extent) of giving up his connection with Lalita Prasad Thakur, just that he seems more charitably inclined toward Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati's line than he was when he left it.

[stonehearted 0]

Gaurasundara: I found this very interesting quote in the article which I would like your comments upon. What do you think?

 

In reply to:

"The worst enemy in the mind of the Gaudiya Math is, not surprisingly, the traditional world of Gaudiya Vaishnavism, because they broke away from this world and are so often forced to defend themselves against the accusation that they do not genuinely represent the Chaitanya Vaishnava tradition. This is the same reason that Iskcon has to worry about the Gaudiya Math, which can always claim that Iskcon does not purely represent the traditions of Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati."

 

I don't actually believe that ISKCON has to worry about the Gaudiya Math. In fact, most branches now accept Srila Prabhupada as an empowered preacher and have praised his work in spreading Sri Sri Gaura-Nitai's church all over the world. And many of them have shown their appreciation by going out and preaching around the world. Whereas they may not have "gotten it" when Srila Prabhupada exhorted them and their gurus to come out and preach worldwide in the mid and late '60s, they seem to get it now. I'm much less interested in confrontation than many other devotees. I'm less interested in dichotomies, which I tend to suspect. I'm mainly interested in how I can some day become a devotee so I can associate with and appreciate those who work in whatever way they can to spread the gospel of Harinama sankirtan.

 

ISKCON's suspicion of other Gaudiya vaishnavas, especially those coming from Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, seems to make much less sense to me than it may have 30 years ago. I'm convinced that whatever problems ISCKON is having that seem to have drained away much of its vigor (at least in many parts of the world) can be traced to a culture of vaishnava aparadha, the worst of which may have been their public campaigns against Srila Sridhar Maharaj, and more recently against Srila Narayana Maharaj. Then there are continued remarks about B. P. Tirtha Maharaj (who Srila Prabhupada explained must certainly have gone back to Godhead due to his decades of tireless service in trying to maintain his guru-maharaja's mission) and Bon Maharaja (whatever transpired in the past is best left there), as well as the campaign to minimize the influence of Sripad Gour-Govinda Maharaja. And while I think it's important to guard against deviation, I think it's well to consider whether the babajis who reside at Radha-kunda are the same as those who Srila Sarasvati Thakura and Srila Prabhupada criticized in the 20th century.

 

 

[gHari 0]

as though Srila Bhaktivinoda would leave his own son without initiation. What kind of father is that? What kind of idiots are we? What vile nature produces such stupidity?

[Guest guest]

I find it rather odd that this "Gaurasundara" finds such obvious "anomalies" with the Gaudiya-Saraswati Parampara, and yet he clings with stubborn faith to A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami.

 

He believes Bhaktivedanta to be "obviously empowered." But yet, he has discovered that Bhaktivedanta's parampara as listed by him lacks believability. He further states that he believes the parampara is somehow correct anyway in spite of this, although he admits that no explanation presented to him thus far has been satisfactory in that regard. Yet he thinks that a satisfactory explanation for the parampara's anomalies exists somewhere, and that some highly qualified, empowered individual exists or will come into being and who can enlighten him on this.

 

I for one am getting tired of this whiny, cry-baby sentimentality.

 

You've established that the Bhaktivedanta parampara is not formalized by diksha in at least some cases. You have established that some individuals listed in the parampara have not even met their alleged gurus. You feel you have defeated everyone to date who tried to refute your arguments here.

 

So why are you still clinging to Bhaktivedanta Swami and ISKCON?

 

 

Throughout my life, Srila Prabhupada has been my very life. I may have offended him in my younger years due to not knowing his sublime position, and I shed hot tears and fall at his holy feet hoping that he may mercifully forgive me for all the offenses I have committed. I still bow down to the arca-murti of Srila Prabhupada whenever I visit the temple. I pray to him for his divine guidance so that I may find a bona-fide guru. I have nothing but total love and adoration for Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Get a grip on yourself man!

 

You think because you cry tears everytime you read his books, then it therefore makes him such an empowered "personality?" I cry tears everytime the neighborhood dog sings at the moon! It doesn't make that dog an avatar!

 

You have stated that you think some "highly qualified" individual exists or will exist who can answer your doubts regarding the Bhaktivedanta parampara? What is your basis in such a belief? If you have already refuted all the possible explanations, then what explanation remains which will remove your doubts?

 

Who is this "qualified" individual who will take away your doubts? What evidence have you that he exists or will exist? You have chided others for being blind followers or fanatics of their beliefs - how is it any different, this belief of yours that a "gifted individual" exists who will provide you with the explanations you seek?

 

What's the matter with you? You need to get out of ISKCON and head for the hills, or better yet, for India - where you can meet the "real thing."

 

Your problem is that you have the brains to come to a conclusion, but you lack the guts to act upon it. "The Bhaktivedanta parampara is a sham" - this is what you have stopped just short of saying. Why? You proved it yourself. Everyone who has disagreed with you has been deemed by you to be a fanatic of one type or another. You are the only intelligent one here. So get on with it! Go to India, perhaps to Vrindavan, and take initiation from one of the many unbroken disciplic lines.

 

What's keeping you near ISKCON? The creature comforts available in the Western world? A girlfriend? The promise of meeting a girl at Sunday feast? The "pizza" prasadam and other unorthodox innovations? The preferences of your parents? Put aside all these material desires of yours and find a genuine guru from an unbroken disciplic line.

 

Or is it because Bhaktivedanta's teachings rescued you from Sai Baba that you feel you owe him something? Come on, man. Sai Baba is a magician. Any beggar on the street could refute his ideas; obviously Bhaktivedanta will look great compared to Sai Baba - anyone would.

 

You will be waiting in vain if you choose to wait for someone to authenticate the Bhaktivedanta parampara for you. Have the courage to act upon your conclusions, instead of clinging to the childish idea that some self-effulgent guru will come along and refute them for you. Don't waste your intelligence pointing out doubts that will never be refuted. Get out of ISKCON and live in Vrindavan now if you really want something genuine.

 

And if you aren't prepared to do that, then stop whining about your doubts as if someone here can fix them for you. You made your bed, now sleep in it.

 

Jag

 

[gHari 0]

I told you before that if you remain with that crowd it would be over. The scholars. We've seen their pictures in the Gita expounding from their lofty minds. They worship their minds, not Krsna. The ultimate snare, His protection from the poseurs. They string rumours and words together to orchestrate their emotions, for that is all the mind can do without a heart without genuine transcendental impressions.

 

But don't assume that Jag is writing from Vrindavan. He needs his ego fix by extolling his mind. Vrindaban is hardly the venue for that.

[Guest guest]

Why allow such blashphemous drivel in the the guise of polished reason perpetuated ?

Malicious,vindictive and utterly offensive to the Vaisnava saints who circle the globe to spread the Holy Names.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

As far as I know, the last great accessible sadhu was Srimad Gour Govinda Swami Maharaja.

 

 

If he is a great sadhu then follow his teachings. Otherwise your talk is all sentimental nonsense. "Oh, Gour Govinda Maharaja is a great sadhu, but he is actually a fool for following a bogus sampradaya full of anomalies where no one has actually received proper diksha." Isn't that what you actually mean? You think he is a sadhu only because he is no longer present. If he was living you would be criticizing him just like you criticize others in the Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON. Why would you criticize him while living? Because while living he would call you a rascal to your face for suggesting that the Sarasvata line was not properly initiated.

 

What do you know about Gour Govinda Maharaj that makes you think he is a saint? Did you see some glowing jyothi coming out of his aura, or is it that from his teachings and conduct we know he is saintly? Yet you reject his teachings and laugh at them as childish. Yes, GHari is right when he says such people that do this are poseurs. They pretend to respect a saint in name only, but laugh at their teachings. If you think he is a realized saint then respect his teachings and realize he knows more than you - this is called humility, the first step in advancing in spiritual life. Through humility you will come to the point of jnanam, not through your attempt to read many books.

 

 

 

I think I may comment again on those points (o some of them) but right now I have no plans to do so, because frankly, I'm rather upset of this topic arising again and again.

 

 

What? Your upset that this topic started when you started it? Some people are interested in gossip and rumor rather than hari-katha. For such people these types of discussions are really enjoyable.

 

 

I remember stating at various times that I began to study Krishna Consciousness since 1998 or so. That makes 5 years.

 

 

Here is your quote where you state you were following Sai Baba up till 2001:

 

"This took place around December 1990, and I can clearly (and happily!) remember the end date: 5th July 2001."

 

In July of 2001 you finally gave up your belief in Sai Baba. Anyone who follows the path of Srila Prabhupada knows Sai Baba is a fraud from day one. You want us to believe you were a seriously practicing devotee, studying the teachings of Srila Prabhupada for 27 years, yet you didn't have a clue when it came to following a cheater like Sai Baba. And for someone who just came to the actual teachings of Srila Prabhupada two years ago, you want to ridicule saintly people such as Sridhar Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja because they couldn't convince you about their parampara, and their teachings didn't make any sense. You need to wake up and stop pretending your something your not. Just because your family was life members and you had a Krishna art book on your coffee table doesn't mean anything. Following Krishna consciousness is about sacrifice and dedication to the instructions of the spiritual master, not about visiting the local Hare Krishna temple for the Sunday feast because your a Hindu. All of that is fine, but when you want to ridicule people like Bhaktisiddhanta, Sridhar Maharaja and Narayana Maharaja based on this standing, then its time for a reality check.

 

 

How would you know if I am in "first grade" or "fifth grade" or "Post graduate" for that matter? It just seems pretty grandiose to me when somebody comments on other people's learning.

 

 

Because you post things that display a complete lack of knowledge of the subject you are speaking. For example, you wrote:

 

"By the way, are you aware that no Vaishnava school anywhere has a siksa-parampara? No Madhva, no Ramanuja, no Vallabha, no Nimabarki, no nothing."

 

You just don't have a clue about other sampradayas, nor our own - yet you want to pose yourself as someone who has studied these things in depth. This is why GHari calls you a poseur. You may think such statements as yours cited above make your presentation "authoritative", but to those who have studied, it highlights your foolishness and lack of knowledge on the matter. As the famous saying goes, "you know a fool when he opens his mouth".

[theist 1]

Why do you come to this forum where Bhaktivedanta is respected? if your talk was anything more than pretense you would be meditating so deeply on Krsna's eightfold daily pastimes that you would have lost awareness of us 'lowlifes' long ago. Go play manjari somewhere else. You have no connection with Krsna. Like Kaliya you are simply a venom spitter. A snake like sectarianist slithering from forum to forum poisoning the atmosphere wherever you happen to be crawling at the moment.

 

Personally I am lowcast and lack vaisnava manners. Speak that _rap in front of me and I'll simply crack your face with a swift elbow shot.

 

 

[raga 0]

 

What? Your upset that this topic started when you started it?

 

 

Fascinating.

 

 

 

"By the way, are you aware that no Vaishnava school anywhere has a siksa-parampara? No Madhva, no Ramanuja, no Vallabha, no Nimabarki, no nothing."

 

You just don't have a clue about other sampradayas, nor our own - yet you want to pose yourself as someone who has studied these things in depth.

 

 

That being said, do you have information on how they draw their disciplic lines? I am under the impression that Madhvites, at least the mutts, trace their lines by diksa, and the Ramanujaites place much importance on panca-samskara. I don't have much information on Vallabhis and Nimbarkis. Would someone care to fill us in? I'd have to do some more research into the different sampradayas. Particularly the Nimbarkis are interesting.

 

 

 

As the famous saying goes, "you know a fool when he opens his mouth".

 

 

Is this not from Canakya? I tried to track it down recently, without success.

 

 

 

You have stated that you think some "highly qualified" individual exists or will exist who can answer your doubts regarding the Bhaktivedanta parampara? What is your basis in such a belief? If you have already refuted all the possible explanations, then what explanation remains which will remove your doubts?

 

Who is this "qualified" individual who will take away your doubts? What evidence have you that he exists or will exist? You have chided others for being blind followers or fanatics of their beliefs - how is it any different, this belief of yours that a "gifted individual" exists who will provide you with the explanations you seek?

 

 

I have grown wary of "qualified individuals" who cause "sudden convictions" with their charismatic presence. Sadly they tend to lack in substance when you get down to a careful analysis of the message.

[raga 0]

 

And while I think it's important to guard against deviation, I think it's well to consider whether the babajis who reside at Radha-kunda are the same as those who Srila Sarasvati Thakura and Srila Prabhupada criticized in the 20th century.

 

 

As far as I know there has never been a theologically united community of Radha Kund babajis, at least not during the recent one or two centuries. Radha Kund is a place, not an ashram. This is like "Devotees of New York", which ones please? "I went to New York to preach, and these New York devotees came around, but they didn't respect my message! Damn those NY devotees." I think you get the point.

[Guest guest]

Yes,

ZERO TOLERANCE for those kind of venemous snakes and scorpions.

 

A sadhu is happy to kill poisonous snakes and scorpions.

 

[raga 0]

 

Yes,

ZERO TOLERANCE for those kind of venemous snakes and scorpions.

 

A sadhu is happy to kill poisonous snakes and scorpions.

 

 

Yes. How many of us are sadhu? Raise your hands, all sadhus out there.

 

Too often zero tolerance translates to execution first, trial afterwards -- especially when written in ALL CAPS.

[Guest guest]

Dear Raga,

-----

Yes. How many of us are sadhu? Raise your hands, all sadhus out there.

 

Too often zero tolerance translates to execution first, trial afterwards -- especially when written in ALL CAPS.

-------------------------------

Yes,

what are you proposing that we all quietly injest raggs

denigration of Srila Prabhupada???

[Guruvani 0]

To refer to our critics as snakes and scorpions because they have issues with our examples, behaviour and propaganda is the epitome of fanaticism.

 

All great leaders should be able to stand up against the scrutiny and criticism of others. If they can't, then what do they have to hide? If they can't defeat their critics with reason and rationale then maybe there is something wrong with their approach.

 

A snake is a snake. A person who finds issues with our activities has the right to disagree. He should not be labled a snake just because he has a different viewpoint.

 

Prabhupada can stand up to all forms of criticism, but one must have the capacity to defend him with sufficient insight and resources. Before we can defend Prabhupada from his critics we must ourselves have struggled with these questions and doubts and realized the right conclusions ourselves.

 

We hear so much about tradition nowadays, but really we all have a very narrow and limited understanding of the parampara traditon that has been going on for millions of years. We look back a couple hundred years and try to make a judgement about a parampara that has been around for millions of years. A tradition can be established with as little as two or three generations, but the parampara has been around for millions and millions of years. We take one page out of the book of history and call that tradition.

 

Most of the history of the parampara is unknown and unknowable to us. We have almost no real perception of the history of the parampara beyond the past few hunded years that we call "the tradition".

 

The only real tradition of the parampara is that transcendental knowledge and spiritual mantras have been passed down from guru to disciple for millions of years. The formalities and cultural features of that parampara must change according to time and circumstance. There is no "one size fits all" for the parampara. It must be flexible and dynamic according to the needs of the time.

 

[theist 1]

to give all such snakes your email and you can converse with such all day long. Me, I'll carry a long heavy stick.

 

If after all these years you can't tell the difference between an obnoxious snake like offender to your guru and someone expressing honest doubts and seeking a converstaion then what can I say.

 

"Your Momma..." Get it?

[Guest guest]

 

 

You just don't have a clue about other sampradayas, nor our own - yet you want to pose yourself as someone who has studied these things in depth.

 

 

That being said, do you have information on how they draw their disciplic lines? I am under the impression that Madhvites, at least the mutts, trace their lines by diksa, and the Ramanujaites place much importance on panca-samskara. I don't have much information on Vallabhis and Nimbarkis. Would someone care to fill us in? I'd have to do some more research into the different sampradayas. Particularly the Nimbarkis are interesting.

 

 

 

As far as Madhva is concerned, there is a listing of his guru parampara through his dIksha guru Achyuta. But MAdhvas don't use this listing conventionally; they preferentially list his paramparA through VyAsa, although this link is a shiksha link. Madhva's biographies do not describe that he had dIksha performed by VyAsa, but later Vaishnavas appear to accept his instruction by VyAsa as an equivalent.

 

Gaurasundara's claim is that other Vaishnavas do not have a shiksha paramparA. At least in Madhva's case this is clearly incorrect.

[raga 0]

 

As far as Madhva is concerned, there is a listing of his guru parampara through his dIksha guru Achyuta. But MAdhvas don't use this listing conventionally; they preferentially list his paramparA through VyAsa, although this link is a shiksha link. Madhva's biographies do not describe that he had dIksha performed by VyAsa, but later Vaishnavas appear to accept his instruction by VyAsa as an equivalent.

 

 

Which Madhvites present the parampara through Vyasa? Any references?

 

http://www.gosai.com/dvaita/madhvacarya/Madhvacarya-Gaudiya.html

 

Hamsavatara ? Brahma ? Catursana ? Durvasa ? Jnanasindhu Tirtha ? Garudavahana Tirtha ? Kaivalya Tirtha ? Jnanisa Tirtha ? Para Tirtha ? Satya Prajna Tirtha - Prajna Tirtha ? Acyuta Preksa ? Madhva, etc.

 

Apparently this line is presented for instance in Narayan Panditacharya's Manimanjari. N.P. was a contemporary of Madhva, his disciple and biographer.

[Guest guest]

Submit your question to the Dvaita list and you will get the answer you desire. The connection through Achyuta is a formality, the real one emphasized by them is the connection to VyAsa. They will be happy to explain it to you, assuming you really want to know.

 

 

[raga 0]

 

Yes,

what are you proposing that we all quietly injest raggs

denigration of Srila Prabhupada???

 

 

I'm afraid I have no idea what "injest raggs" means. Whatever it may mean, as far as I've understood, this is not an ISKCON forum, but "General questions and discussions on spiritual teachings, practices, etc" forum. This means that you can't jump up to other people's throats and hammer them down for offence like you perhaps could in an ISKCON-forum.

 

If there is a certain policy on what can be said of someone until it crosses the limit, it ought to be visible and uniformly applied to all spiritual leaders, whether Sankara, Radha Kund Babaji, Prabhupad, or Sai Baba. That is, provided this is a forum for Indian Spirituality. Forum headers like "...regular newsletters related to Hindu philosophy" convey the idea that this is an open forum for all branches of Hindu philosophy. In interreligious (or inter-branch) encounters, tolerance must be shown to a greater extent than among members of one's own sect.

[raga 0]

 

Submit your question to the Dvaita list and you will get the answer you desire. The connection through Achyuta is a formality, the real one emphasized by them is the connection to VyAsa. They will be happy to explain it to you, assuming you really want to know.

 

 

Why would I not want to really know? At any rate, you have made a claim. It is up to you to back it up. I have presented evidence to the contrary. Don't expect me to run around seeking evidence for your claims. I value my time, and I don't have the time to involve myself in clarifying every claim I face, particularly so if the claim comes without evidence to substantiate it. I assume you've asked the question on Dvaita-list since you know the answer I'd get. Please just post in the arguments you've seen there.

 

By the way, who are you?