Wonderful Vyasa Puja Offering

[Guest guest]

All Glories to Srila Prabhupada!

 

Hare Krishna,

Please accept my umble obeisances.What follows is HH

Sivarama Maharaja's Vyasapuja offering:Dear Srila Prabhupada,Please accept my

humble obeisances in the dust of your lotus feet.I meditate upon those

glittering particles of dust, which, by the prayers ofyour true followers, have

received the great fortune of always cushioningyour lotus feet. How fortunate

they are! May I also become a grain of thisdust, forever united with your

divine service?On the occasion of your Vyasa-puja, I would like to narrate an

incident thattook place last year. Knowing your fondness for trouncing

Mayavadis, I amconfident this story will bring you some pleasure. In fact, my

hope is thatI may reap the reward of your wide, unrestrained, and

ever-beauteous smile.* * *In July, a well-known Hindu organization launched a

worldwide

yatra on thegrounds of Bhaktivedanta Manor. To preside over the function, they

invitedmany spiritual leaders. To draw a crowd, they imported a popular

bhajaneer.Most likely out of courtesy, they sent me an invitation.When I saw

the milange of spiritual dignitaries, I had second thoughts. Onthe stage were

to be two yogis, a guru, a Sankaracarya, and myself --compromising association!

I inquired about the scheduled speeches and wasassured I would have equal time.

After consultation, I decided to make thebest of the situation and

participate.Sheltering over ten thousands guests, the tent was the largest ever

erectedat the Manor. The guests received prasadam, chanted Hare Krsna, and saw

SriSri Radha-Gokulananda. After all the dignitaries had arrived, the

mainspeakers took their places onstage and the function began.There is little

value in detailing all the speeches. They included thestandard fare of rambling

rhetoric and

humanistic clichis, punctuated withnationalistic slogans and calls for a

cultural renaissance. Oh so drab! Whenmy turn came, I spoke for twenty minutes

on the meaning of sanatana-dharma.I emphasized that the brotherhood of man can

take place only when we acceptour common father, Sri Krsna, and serve Him by

chanting His names.Then, sitting beside me, the Sankaracarya, a small chubby

man my age, withan ignoble tendency to fidget, spoke, regularly alternating

between Hindiand English.In addition to eloquent servings of mish-mash common

to the other speakers,His Holiness made philosophical points clearly targeted

at his hosts --namely, the ISKCON devotees and, more specifically, Their

LordshipsRadha-Gokulananda.When, obviously for my benefit, he said in English,

"It does not matterwhich name you give God, for all names are temporary," I sat

erect andchanted japa loud enough to distract him.In response he diligently

continued to

churn the mish-mash, but true to formhe returned to his Mayavada siddhanta to

exclaim, "The names of God areimmaterial, for above name and form is the

formless eternal"I chanted aloud "Hare Krsna Hare Krsna" as he said, "Brahman"

and my voicerang through his microphone.When the Sankaracarya snarled at me, I

glared at him. As I looked into hiseyes, I understood the nature of his glance.

It was a glance that caught mewhen we first met, a glance whose description then

eluded me. But thatglance was a mystery no more. I understood it in one word --

evil.This is what Caitanya Mahaprabhu meant when He said mayavadi-bhasya

sunilehaya sarva-nasa. I repeated the verse under my breath as the

Sankaracaryafaced the audience.I continued to chant japa loud enough for the

Sankaracarya to hear. Throughhis speech he made one more classical jab,

describing the Ultimate as pureknowledge and the worship of Deities as a

temporary means to Brahman.

Thenit was over. Thank the Lord!By now my pulse was pounding, and there were

still speeches and bhajans tosit through. I felt that you, Srila Prabhupada,

our Society, and of courseKrsna had been grievously offended. If I said nothing

I would melt in shame.As another Yogiji began his speech, I leant over the arm

of my chair andsmiled, "Swamiji!" The Sankaracarya turned to face me."I have

something to say." He nodded. "In your talk there were some highlyobjectionable

points. They were neither sastric nor appropriate to say onour premises," I

said.There we were, the Sankaracarya and I, in the midst of

soul-sedatingspeeches, engaged in an animated, unamplified debate, on a stage

full ofdignitaries, and in plain view of thousands. Later, devotees asked me,

"Wereyou having an interfaith dialogue?" Hardly.The Sankaracarya replied, "What

I have said is all right""No!" I interjected smiling, "In Krsna's temple you

have said that

Krsna isa subordinate manifestation of Brahman. You said the Absolute Truth is,

inreality, nirguna. That is both impolite and against the Vedic conclusion."His

eyes opened wide at my challenge. Then, leaning closer, the Sankaracaryasaid,

"But Krsna says, sasvatasya ca dharmasya sukhasyaikantikasya ca. Thebasis of

happiness is the Ultimate -- Brahman."As Yogiji (the current speaker) was

making an animated speech, I had tospeak loudly. "No! You are misrepresenting

Krsna. He first says, brahmano hipratisthaham. He says Brahman rests on Him. If

one thing rests on another itis because it is subordinate and dependent.

Likewise Brahman rests on Krsnabecause it is subordinate to Krsna, and it is

Krsna who is the Ultimate."The Sankaracarya was taken aback. It appeared he did

not expect me to knowthe verse he had quoted. "You do not understand" he said.I

interrupted him over thunderous applause for Yogiji (who knows what he

hadsaid?). "I

understand pratistha," I replied. "It means Brahman rests onKrsna and is

dependent on Him. There is no ambiguity in the meaning of theword. What other

understanding is there? You tell me if you know better."The Sankaracarya was

clearly flustered by my assault. He smiled me away andsaid, "There is no defect

in Brahman. It is perfect and complete. Om purnamadah purnam idam purnat purnam

udacyate"I completed the sloka, again to his surprise. Then I said, "It is

perfectand complete, but behind Brahman is its source and rest -- a person."He

waved his hand to dismiss my argument. I looked out over a sea of faces.The

guests were alternating between hearing Yogiji, who was now singing abhajana,

and observing my argument with the Sankaracarya. It was a doubleperformance.The

Sankaracarya rambled through textbook jargon, "Personality, form,qualities --

these are all temporary features of the complete, formlessTruth. The person is

not

behind, but produced of Brahman"I continued, "No, the person is the basis of

Brahman. Hiranmayena patrenasatyasyapihitam mukham / tat tvam pusann apavrnu

satya-dharmaya drstaye.Isopanisad, which you quoted, says that Brahman should

be removed to see theface, mukham, of the Ultimate. That face is the face of a

person, Krsna. Oneremoves something inferior to reveal something superior.

Thus, because Krsnais the essence, Brahman is disposable."Even in this age of

disposable everything, the Sankaracarya was clearlydisturbed to hear about the

"disposable Brahman."Showing clear discomfort at my argument, he sidestepped it

to quote (of allsastra) the Bhagavatam (and of all verses) "satyam param

dhimahi." He said,"Swamiji, Brahman is knowledge, truth -- satyam -- and it is

Supreme --param."I was really disappointed at the Sankaracarya's repertoire of

half-doneslokas. I fumed, "But who is param satyam? Vyasadeva prays, om

namobhagavate vasudevaya. It is Vasudeva, Krsna. So meditate on Him, for He

isthe Supreme Truth. That is what param satyam means. Param satyam, the

objectof meditation (dhimahi) at the end of the sloka, is the same

bhagavatevasudevaya offered respects (namah) at its beginning. That is

Jaimini'slaw."A round of applause for Yogiji's completed bhajana filled the

air, as myopponent abandoned sastra for incongruous logic. Shaking with anger,

hiseyebrows furrowed, the Sankaracarya said, "It is unnecessary to argue

overapparent differences."Saying this he raised his arm and pointed to one of

the overhead lights atstage right. As he did, the entire audience followed his

gesture. EvenYogiji looked distracted as he continued to propound the glories

of themotherland, the mother tongue, and one's own mother.The Sankaracarya

said, "That light is energy. But it is the energy of aflowing river now

transformed into electricity. In the

ultimate issue theyare one. Everywhere there is one energy, which appears in

different forms.Similarly Krsna"Having no taste for what was coming, I cut in,

"But who designed themachinery which transforms the energy of a river into the

energy of light?"I slapped my armrest to the surprise of some dignitaries in

the first row."They were engineers -- people. People manipulate energy, not

visa versa.Thus, in your example, Krsna, the Supreme Person, manipulates

Brahman to bethe substratum of energy by which He creates and pervades this

world,jagat."Much to the Sankaracarya's dismay, I continued to argue the

example of thestage light. When I pointed to a spotlight at stage left, the

audienceturned right; in his retort the Sankaracarya pointed to a spotlight at

stageright, and the audience turned left. And so it went on.Finally Yogiji

finished his talk, and both I and the Sankaracarya settledback in our seats.

But there was one

last thing to say. I smiled at him,"But Swamiji, you know what Adi Sankara

said."While the MC was extolling the glories of the next speaker, the

Sankaracaryareplied gruffly, "What is that?"I said, "bhaja govindam bhaja

govindam bhaja govindam," and stopped.He looked at me, and for a moment our

eyes locked. It was more than theconflict of two men, more than a conflict of

different schools ofphilosophy. It was the age-old clash of two classes of

souls: those who tryto justify their rebellion against Krsna, and those who

desire to rectifyit.Gazing into his eyes, speaking very audibly, I continued,

"mudha-mate."The Sankaracarya jerked -- shocked. In a public assembly I had

implied hewas a mudha!To soften the blow I continued, "prapte sannihite kala

marane na hi na hiraksati dukrn-karane."He turned away. But I said

nothing.Perhaps I was guilty of inhospitality to a guest -- an

unfortunatetransgression of etiquette.

However, I did not want to tolerate grievousoffenses to the Lord -- a major

spiritual transgression.Sure enough, in a moment the Sankaracarya leant over to

me and said, "Excuseme, I must go to the toilet." He rose with his escort of

followers andreassured me, "I will be back. I will be back."But I knew he

wouldn't be back. The organizers were unsure why theSankaracarya left untimely

in his Mercedes, retinue and all. They werepuzzled, I was happy.* * *Dear Srila

Prabhupada! The dialogue I have given above is accurate. Forobvious reasons I

have avoided mentioning names.Thank you, Srila Prabhupada, for being the

perfect teacher. You have taughtus the perfect science of transcendence, you

have taught us the arguments ofthose who oppose that science, and you have

taught us how to refute thosearguments.While speaking to the Sankaracarya, I

felt so proud to be your disciple. Ifelt so confident that nothing he said

could shake

my faith. I knew that forevery misconception he might put forward, you have

given us a perfectretort. For you, the Absolute Truth was not a philosophical

concept but yourpersonal friend and loving associate.That night, after the

speeches had concluded, after the guests had departed,after the dignitaries had

been dined, I sat before my Deities to review thedebate with the Sankaracarya.

As you once said, "It was a good fight." Ilooked at your picture: there was no

doubt, you were pleased. I reveled inthat wonderful feeling of absolute

certainty, "Today I have pleased myspiritual master."May it always be so.Your

servant,Sivarama Swami

Dasan

Narasimhan

 

The New with improved product search