Das Anu das

Thanks Mr Nobody, Likewise and back atcha. Funny I was always a little gullible and wishy washy, always knew I'd sell out. Thank Krsna for Srila Prabhupada's mercy. Made it easy on me. I coulda been a false guru easy I suppose. Gemini stellium in the 10th house and all that. Hare Krsna

Dear Guest, the citation you posted I found tricky until I became very quiet inside while reading it. Madhudivsa is wondering if a person who does not have personal (here refering to physical) association with Srila Prabhupada can become a devotee by reading his books. In Srila Prabhupada's way, he answers the question in the affirmative, yet begins the response with the word NO. Yes, it is possible. It is not that you have to associate with the author. Some people decide that since he says No, it is not that.... means that he is saying no you can't become a devotee without "personal" association. But this would contradict the fact that he says, "it is NOT that you have to associate with the author". So he used a double negative, but the essence is clear. In the next sentence, Srila Prabhupada describes what to do IF someone CANNOT UNDERSTAND (refering to the books) IF one can't understand, then take a lesson from one who knows. (A trained up disiple of his? A godbrother of his? Anyone who knows "the subject matter") So this is not conclusive evidence that one Cannot become a pure devotee and acheive Love of Godhead by only reading Srila Prabhupada's books, and following his instructions. Although those instructions include Sadhu Sanga, and many other types of activities based on association, One who CAN UNDERSTAND has no need for an interpreter to understand what Srila Prabhupada describes and instructs in his Books on any level. Unless anyone has proof otherwise. Hari Bol

Dear Puru Das, Dandavats. All Glories to AC Bhaktivedanta Swami and true Vaisnavas everywhere. Love and Affection are broadcast through the ethers and connect to whom those sentiments are intended, regardless of the physical obstacles between communicants, such as a computer. Though I agree with you that generally, Cyberspace is filled with head-trippers who have bypassed most of their human emotional body, and seek only mental control of others. something you just wrote struck me particularly. "Thanks for your concern, but the only "problem" in responding to Vaisnava aparadha and apasiddhanta is that there is so much siddhanta that our acaryas have left explaining what Srila Rupa Gosvami has taught that sometimes it is hard to decide which to utilize." Herein lies the Glory of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhpada who said. Suppose I have heard something from my spiritual master, so I speak to you the same thing. So this is parampara system. You cannot imagine what my spiritual master said. Or even if you read some books, you cannot understand unless you understand it from me. This is called parampara system. You cannot jump over to the superior guru, neglecting the next acharya, immediate next acharya." (Srila Prabhupada lecture December 8th, 1973) As any truly empowered Acharya does, he took into account his audience, and encapsulated Srila Rupa Goswami's instructions for us fallen Westerners. So personally I limit myself to his instructions on any matter and consider that he has brought me the essence of All previous acharyas in the Gaudiya Sampradaya which he represents. He knew we were not suited to read and examine the full body of direct writings of Srila Rupa Goswami and apply them to our lives. Or else we would have been born at his lotus feet! So the Lord is kind enough to make an adjustment. So we must place our faith in the orders of the Acharya who is the Current link to the Sampradaya and we will not be left confused. I hope this finds you well. y.s. Mark

Dear Puru Das, That was an interesting reply to my points. I have now become even more clear on this issue. You wrote. "As you pointed out there may be posters who stay anonymous with no ill intent in mind. Indeed there may be others that stay anonymous simply to generate contention and make mischief." For the record, the statement. "Indeed there may be others that stay anonymous simply to generate contention and make mischief" was made by you. First of all, whenever anyone challenges a point someone else makes, this is the defiinition of contention. This is normal in discussion, to seek authoritative reference on points another makes that are not presented as such, and may be in doubt to the listener. Mischief is quite another matter. I personally see little if any of this. And posting anonymously gives no immunity to such a mischief maker. A moderator can see it for what it is and block the ISP. You said. "Remaining anonymous on these forums is all too often a way to hide behind a keyboard, and not be honest enough to take responsibility for what you post. Like wearing a mask. Say anything, do anything and no one knows who you are." Here you have a point. Only in that if a person breaks the law, being slanderous, libelous, or making threat of violence, it is a easier to avoid prosecution. But not foolproof. You said. "Freedom to commit cyber aparadha with the only consequence your continuance in the cycle of samsara." What other consequence is there? I see plenty of people on this forum committing aparadha every day, who post under their names. They are usually the ones most raising a stink about all the aparadha they see, because they are strictly unaware of their own, and this is because they actually believe they are above such things as I pointed out earlier. The consequences of committing aparadha are doled out by the Supreme Lord. To imagine that doing so under anonymity here would mitigate the justice doled out by the Lord is aparadha in itself. But I am sure now that I put it this way, you realize your mistake. You said. "However you cannot hide from Supersoul and He knows everyone's isp." Very clever and true. Although that doesn't match your previous conclusion about consequences. Which brings me to the point of clarity I mentioned earlier. It seems that the biggest problem you are having is actually that you recieve the greatest flat out challenge from anonymous posters. That you have difficulty refuting their challenges, and thus consider that they must be either offensive to your Guru, and unneccessarily critical, or mischief makers. As if knowing their name would enable you to present your side of the story with more potency and effect. Nevermind the history we all know so well of people who get banned, beaten, or worse when issuing a strong challenge to the party line in any scenario. Especially one where those challenged are not actually capable of mounting a significant defense. And the frustration from that inability mounts into a behavior of lashing out, instead of submitting that Maybe. Just maybe. There is something you are missing. In the "old days" people would enter into debate happy to win or lose. Because the goal was to get closer to the truth. Losing just meant winning. And recognition that someone else had defeated you meant glory to the Lord. These days, I expect no such thing, nor do the other anonymous posters I know. I feel largely these are forays into highly sectarian camps. People stand upon their illusions as rock solid truth, and even in the face of one pointing it out with alacrity, lucidity, and aplomb, they still deny it, and instead go into damage control mode, labeling as offensive the victor. The only benefit is usually that this behavior is revealed, and anyone innocent who was on the fence now has a better idea of the product they were eyeing up. I have actually enjoyed some nice discussions here, but your complaint is certainly indicative of the type I just described, for all the reasons mentioned. You seem like a strongly intellectual person. I wish you would take this observation of mine to heart, and rely on your ability to present the facts in any case, and look forward to being shown a greater light once in awhile when you face that inevitable moment. sincerely Mark

Dear Puru Das, please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada and Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. you said. "True enough that anyone's identity shows through his words to some extent, but it is simply a matter of honesty, and being straightforward." A person't identity is not their name. A person is truly identified by their actions and position regarding a Bonafide Vaisnava Acharya of Some Sampradaya. That is the Full extent to which one can be identified in the true sense of the word therefore. Remaining anonymous in terms of one's name is not a matter of dishonesty, because there was no lie committed. This forum does not require a person reveal their name. Thus no dishonesty. And I am being straightforward with you right now. And you do not know my birth name. You can refer to me as Das Anu Das, and I will respond to you in the same way as if you called me my birth name. It matters not. You said, In any other style of public "debate" concerning religion and politics are not the particpants identifed and their affiliations understood? And it is not any matter of "ranking." Krsna says all living beings are His parts and parcels. Every soul is equal in Krsna's eyes, but everyone's experience is not identical. Spiritual discussions are supposed to be based on guru,sadhu and shastra. I do not know of the other "styles" of public debate concerning religion an politics, because I stick to speaking of issues of Sanatana Dharma as promulgated by the Gaudiya Sampradaya Acharya HDG A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. That is my affiliation, and anyone who reads what I say can identify it as such. And as far as comparing etiquette for a true spiritual discussion to mundane debates on religion and politics... "Devotees always humbly offer respect to everyone, but when there is a discussion on a point of sastras (scripture), they do not observe the usual etiquette, satyam bruyat priyam bruyat. They speak only the satyam (truth), although it may not necessarily be priyam (following norms of etiquette)." (Srila Prabhupada Letter, August 7th,1976) But I offer you a degree of respect anyway, because you have not indicated you deserve less. You then quoted an extensive analysis of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur regarding the guidelines for a Madhyama Adhikari in dealing with the inimical. I seek to attain such a platform of behavior, and as I purify, may it be so. You then said. "Seems to me that too much aparadha creeps into these discussions. Seems to me we would all be better off to try and become more swan life, as SBT recommends in his essay Non Sectarian Vaisnava Dharma. Since we are conditioned souls we see external differences , when in the higher realms of behavior any apparant inconsistancies are easily resolved and harmonized by the transcendental atmosphere." So we try. Meanwhile, we commit small offenses. We become emotional in presenting our positions. May he who has not sinned throw the first stone. I have seen too many people duck out of a substantial debate claiming to be offended by a person who showed a little swagger, when this did not at all minimize the substance of their superior stance. It is simply a tuck and run technique. The purifying fire is to accept these slights when made against oneself, and try to bring the debate back on point. The ad-hominem nature of such a slight does not prove victory, so why should it dissuade someone from continuing. Unless that is all the person is doing. Then it is not a debate, it is a waste of time. Much of the "debate" I see on this forum and so many others is more accurately characterized as people who have some small sectarian stance in regards to their authority, who have some small fanaticism, but will not acknowlege it. Thus they engage in no discussion. Their minds are already made up, and they use cherry picked quotes from Scritpure or their authority figure of choice in an attempt to bludgeon one another into seeing their way. This amounts to a circus in the name of debate. It is not always the case, but certainly the holier than thou, my stool doesn't stink is THE prominent mood whenever an issue of controversy is brought up. So while conceptually, in "higher realms of behavior" inconsitencies are harmonized etc., perhapst we could all be a little more honest about recognizing what realm we are ACTUALLY behaving from, and we might be a little more tolerant of others, and THEN we will see some purification and harmonization. Thanks for inspiring me to expound on something I feel important. My intention was not to minimize what in ordinary situations would be good points made by your self, but in this case, please consider that many anonymous posters here are actually highly qualified Vaisnavas wading into a sectarian battle ground, not to associate with the inimical, but to sneak under the radar and point out their inconsistencies for the benefit of the innocent who wander to a discussion board looking for spiritual nourishment and thus very vulnerable to a well-polished presentation with a rotten core. your servant of the servants, Das Anu Das

My apologies Prabhu. Your words are your actions, and are your actions are in Krsna Consciousness as I see it in you, for what it is worth. My sentiment trips me up as I place the cart before the horse on occasion, although having plenty of experience showing the error of this. Emotion is a swift rushing river. Also, for what it is worth, I see light. I see some outstanding devotees who have become highly purified, and they work together to approximate the level of Shelter available to the World when Srila Prabhupada was on the planet, by purifiying themselves of any doubt that he is not fully present and just as potent here now. I can see that any day, the Revival of Iskcon as offered by Srila Prabhupada will be more glorious than we can imagine, and that the community and comraderie will be so palpable and potent, that the innocent will have total shelter, cradle to grave, basic human and spiritual needs accounted for. And this will minimize the need to spend time beating our heads against the brick wall of puffed up envious fools in a seemingly endless tug of war for the minds of the innocent who are listening to their missives from behind their computer screen, vulnerable at any second to take the plunge into poor association, and thus necessitating heroic actions such as your own to keep them hesitant to take such a step. But until you and I and others can offer a fully grounded situation and invite these folk to experience Iskcon as it is, in a loving, supportive, family friendly western/vedic community, the damage control we do, while purifying, is like finding sand in the sweet rice, and I cannot deny it. Hare Krsna

Dear Puru Das, All Glories to Sri Guru and Gauranga. Truly, there is no better way to know someone than by what they say when stating their position on an issue. I would like to know what knowing someone's name or nominal devotional rank would do for you when faced with the truth or lack thereof regarding their stated positions. Not all who wander are lost. Not all who post "anonymously" are ill-intended. And thus their true identity shows through. Hare Krsna

G Hari said. "Hari Nama initiation is not known as diksa in ISKCON" I know what you meant to say, but what you said is not entirely true. Hari Nama initiation is not known as Formal Diksa Initiation in Iskcon. 2nd or Brahmana initiation where one receives the gayatri mantra is known as Formal Diksa Initiation. Diksa is a process. "Diksa is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activity. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows this process as diksa." (C.c. Madhya, 15.108, purport) To enter the process of Transcendental Diksa is not dependent on Formal Initiation, “Srila Prabhupada said ‘From 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiatied, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initi- ation by my Guru Maharaja. Then, officially, I was initiated in 1933, because in 1923 I left Calcutta.’ yet in the case of most cases of material conditioning, Formal Initiation supports the Process of Diksa as it unfolds. see CC Mad.15:108 The vow to chant the Maha-Mantra and follow the rules and regs is made at the 1st Hari Nama Initiation. So this clearly shows that the disciple is already engaged in the process of Diksa. Srila Narayana Maharaja gives a very long, detailed, and authoritatively referenced lecture, the conclusion of which is that everyone must undergo 2nd or Brahmana Gayatri or Diksa Mantra inititiation in order to relieve themselves of offenses to chanting the Holy Name, and that it is the example set by every acharya in our line, See VNN and look for this page The Absolute Necessity Of Second Initiation Jan 30, 2003 Yet the process of Diksa begins, or is initiated, when a person accepts the instructions of a great soul to chant and follow some instructions. Diksa, being a process, cannot be defined by a stage or supporting event within the process, such as a formal initiation. As for why the 2nd or Brahman initiation is considered the Formal Diksa Initiation, that I do not have an answer for. My inference would be that for so many fallen souls, the process of Diksa cannot be completed without it, and thus it gets this emphasis. The Process of Diksa is complete when the disciple has all transcendental knowledge the Mantras have to give. "Then you can say 'Yes, I know everything' Diksa. Diksa, initiation, diksa, this Sanskrit word, diksa, means divya-jnanam ksipayati ask from spiritual master with service and surrender the transcendental knowledge. The more you ask, you become a man of knowledge. Then you can challenge, and then 'Yes, I know everything'. " (Morning Walk 11th June 1974) "Which explains the of divya-jnana, transcendental, that is diksa. Di divya diksanam. Diksa. Divya-jnana, transcendental knowledge. [...] if you don't accept a spiritual master how you'll get transcen...You'll be taught here and there, here and there, and waste time. Waste time for the teacher and waste your valuable time. Therefore you have to be guided by an expert Spiritual Master. " (Room Conversation 27th January 1977) "In the matter if of divya-jnana - [it comprises] knowledge of the original form [conveyed] within the divine mantra along with which is specific knowledge of [the individuals] relationship with the Supreme Lord. " (Bhakti Sandarbha 243) Hare Krsna

Wordsmith Prabhu, I have not elsewhere seen where Srila Prabhupada has given the instruction to his disciples to "fall down before Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu and beg for the Maha-mantra from Lord." And in the passage CC Adi 9:36, he says that followers of Bhaktivinode would do this. And this was the only time he gave this instruction. I can understand that we all follow all the previous bona fide Sampradaya Acharyas in essence. But it seems to me that largely and more specifically Srila Prabhupada's instructions were to share the Maha-mantra with others, and to request they follow the rules and regs of his society. So Sri Caityanya Mahaprabhu initiated the whole world by purely sharing the Maha-mantra. Thus regardless of who shares it with us, if they follow the most recent purified acharya's instructions on how to share the maha mantra and repeat his instructions on how to chant it in a way that we will purify our offenses, they are representing the acharya perfectly, and true initiation or diksa occurs. So since this passage in the CC is a small part of the conglomerate of instructions on this sharing, I see it as follows. When we Preceed the chanting of the Maha-Mantra with Pranams to Sri Krsna Caitanya - Pancha Tattva, we are falling at the feet of MahaPrabhu, and begging for the ability to receive the pure nama in all its glory. I hope this expansion pleases you. Hare Krsna

Dear Bhakta Don, When considering those who are rejecting the message of the Bhagavat in this play, and what must be done to check their progress, be sure to go for the Head of the Snake first. Then, all of those who were influenced as victims by the wrong philosophy will be leaderless, disorganized, and largely defeated, and then may be preached to with more success. See crescentandcross . com and the articles by Mark Glenn, in particular, "In their own words' "Six simple words' "you might be an...." y.s. Das Anu das