Preaching far and wide?

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, Madhava wrote:

> "Whomever you meet, instruct him about Krishna. On my order become a guru and

deliver the land you live in."

> Here Prabhu gives the order to deliver people in the land one lives in. >

 

Great, but do it.

 

 

 

 

> The fastest way is not the only way, nor indeed always the best way.

 

Prabhupada said if you try for outstanding, you'll become

first-class; if you try for first-class, you'll get third-class; if

you just try as you can, you fail.

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

achintya, "Madhava" <harekrishna@s...> wrote:

 

> Krishna Susarla has presented extensive arguments to the extent

that the followers of Sri Caitanya must travel and preach far and

wide. However, none of the verses he quotes conclusively

substantiates his argument, given that a conservative translation is

accepted instead of the one presented by him. The verses quoted are

as follows:

>

 

[snip]

 

>

> The instruction in 9.36 is for everyone (sabAkare) to give it to

whomsoever one meets (yare tare). In 9.39, the words yare tare are

again used, to "whomever, to him". Nowhere do these verses propose

that one individual should try to go everywhere. As people meet each

other, the message will naturally spread without extraneous endeavor.

>

 

While simultaneously disagreeing with the translation, nevertheless

you are confirming what I already read - that Mahaaprabhu instructed

His followers to preach to anyone, anywhere. Your points

notwithstanding, there is nothing in the above verses to suggest that

He meant only Bengal or only India. Logically, He could only have

meant all of humanity. And that is what Srila Bhaktivedanta

Prabhupada did - spread Krishna-consciousness all over the globe for

the first time. I'm rather surprised to see you quibble about this,

since even a very conservative reading indicates that Mahaaprabhu

wanted us to preach to everyone and anyone, not just to people in

India. No, I don't agree with you at all. What Srila Bhaktivedanta

Prabhupada did was to take this instruction to its logical

conclusion, and that is why he and his line are more true to the

instruction than those who criticize him. Please note, once more,

that this discussion is only being held because of criticisms to the

effect that his line is either "deviant" or "novel" in its

presentation. Otherwise, there would be no discussion of this nature.

I'm happy to accept solitary renunciants as Vaishnavas, but don't

expect me to accept them on the same level as the travelling

preacher, especially when the former criticizes the latter.

 

> I will quote one more verse missing from the series of shloka you

present, namely the famous instruction of Sri Caitanya to brahmin

Vasudeva (CC 2.7.128).

>

> yAre dekha, tAre kaha 'kRSNa'-upadeza

>

> AmAra AjJAya guru haJA tAra' ei deza

>

>

> "Whomever you meet, instruct him about Krishna. On my order become

a guru and deliver the land you live in."

>

> Here Prabhu gives the order to deliver people in the land one lives

in. Further, two verses ahead, it is stated that at whomsoever's

house Prabhu stopped, he gave the same order to them.

>

 

But it clearly says, "whomever you meet..." No, I'm afraid I do not

accept your hypothesis that He meant only in India. He was thinking

far ahead of that.

 

> Thus there is certainly no fault or disobedience if each individual

stays in his own land and preaches there. In this way, the Krishna

consciousness movement becomes naturally established everywhere in

the course of time without extraneous endeavors. The fastest way is

not the only way, nor indeed always the best way.

>

 

As I mentioned previously, my purpose is not to find fault with the

nonmoving devotees, but only to point out that what Srila Prabupada

did was to take Mahaaprabhu's instructions to their logical

conclusion. Hence, he deserves the respect of the critics - not as

just any Vaishnava, but as a Gaudiiya Vaishnva. He has remained more

true to that instruction than those who stay within their land. Now

you could argue that Bhaktivinod Thakur, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati,

and many others also never left India. To this I would simply respond

that these esteemed personalities would never try to disown a

disciplic descendent who had done what Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada

did. But disowning him is exactly what the critics are trying to do,

and all that in the name of Gaudiiya Vaishnavism, which as I seem to

recall, Lord Chaitanya Mahaaprabhu had something to do with.

 

> If on account of their attachment to the holy land of Vraja and to

all the lila-sthanas therein the mahatma who is desirous to preach

cannot leave Vraja, then certainly on his sheer desire preaching will

be done, as people will come to him, accept his message and spread it

elsewhere.

>

 

Then perhaps the mahatma can argue that the follower who was

successful isn't truly of his line, because of so many external

differences in presentation and approach.

 

> Speaking of the desire of Mahaprabhu, it is accepted that Rupa

fulfilled and established his desires. Would someone like to

demonstrate, on the basis of Rupa Gosvami's writings, what are the

essential desires of Sri Caitanya for his followers? I am certain

that will prove to be interesting.

>

 

I am happy to take Srila Rupa Gosvami's writings into account. All I

have argued, time and again, is that they shouldn't be used as an

excuse to minimize Lord Chaitanya's instructions, which is what is

being done here.

 

 

> Please send me, either here or in private letter, a comprehensive

list of everything you consider outrageous and unjust criticism.

>

 

The essay entitled "Why Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Never Received

Initiation," which was posted on Nitai dasa's website, contains many

examples of the clearly unsophisticated and even blatantly low-class

criticisms. I have quoted some of them several times here - too many

times for a forum such as this. If you can't see which ones are

obviously improper, then it isn't likely that my pointing them out to

you will have much effect. I hope you aren't going to try to offer an

apologistic explanation in their defense. Bad behavior is bad

behavior, simply put. I have never backed down from pointing this out

to Srila Prabhupada's followers when I thought they were going too

far, at least not in any thread in which I was actively participating.

 

regards,

 

- K