Taking Srila Prabhupada Srtaight

[Guest guest]

> I also have problems with many of NM's followers who seem to draw

> distinctions between Lord Krishna and His expansions. This is not a

> sectarian bias either, because I have that same problem with ISKCON

> devotees who do the same.

 

What kind of distinctions you mean? In terms of tattva, Lord Krishna and His

expansions are nondifferent, no doubt. Yet there is a lot of difference in

terms of rasa. That's why Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said:

 

syamam eva param rupam

puri madhu-puri vara

vayah kaisorakam dhyeyam

adya eva paro rasah

 

TRANSLATION

 

"‘The form of Syamasundara is the supreme form, the city of Mathura is the

supreme abode, Lord Krsna's fresh youth should always be meditated upon,

and the mellow of conjugal love is the supreme mellow.'"

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Madhya 19.106

 

There is also a very nice verse by Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakur

(aradhyo bhagavan vrajesa tanayas tad dhama vrindavanam) explaining who,

according to the opinion of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, is our aradhya-deva, or

worshipable Lord. Now I don't have the whole verse on hand. Can anyone send

it?

 

I believe that similar verses can be found in books of Srila Rupa Gosvami

and other our acaryas.

 

Your servant

[Guest guest]

> [Text 2638102 from COM]

>

> > I also have problems with many of NM's followers who seem to draw

> > distinctions between Lord Krishna and His expansions. This is not a

> > sectarian bias either, because I have that same problem with ISKCON

> > devotees who do the same.

>

> What kind of distinctions you mean? In terms of tattva, Lord Krishna and

His

> expansions are nondifferent, no doubt.

 

What I'm talking about is comments like, "in ISKCON, they are only

interested in Rama, Narasimha" or some such condescending nonsense. I find

it telling that Srila Prabhupada never made comments like that, and was

appropriately respectful of all devotees of the Lord, regardless of their

individual preference in worship.

 

Also, I have found explicit mention in Jiva Gosvami's Bhagavat Sandarbha

that there is no difference in terms of potency of the different forms of

the Lord. I have little patience, therefore, for those who cannot see

Krishna in His other forms, but choose instead to imply that these other

forms are somehow inferior.

 

yours,

 

Krishna

[Guest guest]

>

>

> What kind of distinctions you mean? In terms of tattva, Lord Krishna and His

> expansions are nondifferent, no doubt. Yet there is a lot of difference in

> terms of rasa. That's why Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said:

>

> syamam eva param rupam

> puri madhu-puri vara

> vayah kaisorakam dhyeyam

> adya eva paro rasah

>

> TRANSLATION

>

> "The form of Syamasundara is the supreme form, the city of Mathura is the

> supreme abode, Lord Krsna's fresh youth should always be meditated upon,

> and the mellow of conjugal love is the supreme mellow.'"

>

> >>> Ref. VedaBase => Madhya 19.106

>

 

Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the

diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in the

city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They want the

recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the sampradayas, the

dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation like the above.

Unfortunately, this verse had no purport, so I looked for another one like it.

 

TRANSLATION

Since that time, the city of Mathura had been the capital of all the kings of

the Yadu dynasty. The city and district of Mathura are very intimately

connected

with Krsna, for Lord Krsna lives there eternally.

PURPORT

It is understood that Mathura City is the transcendental abode of Lord Krsna;

it

is not an ordinary material city, for it is eternally connected with the

Supreme

Personality of Godhead. Vrndavana is within the jurisdiction of Mathura, and it

still continues to exist. Because Mathura and Vrndavana are intimately

connected

with Krsna eternally, it is said that Lord Krsna never leaves Vrndavana

(vrndavanam parityajya padam ekam na gacchati). At present, the place known as

Vrndavana, in the district of Mathura, continues its position as a

transcendental place, and certainly anyone who goes there becomes

transcendentally purified.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 10.1.28

 

 

So from this, we can understand that the significance of Mathura is it's

relationship toVrindaban. It is the district as a whole that is auspicious.

and what is the special feature of Vrindaban? It is there that Krsna is with

the cows. So thinking that the Supreme Conception is Krsna without cows, is

lacking. And I don't see any one in all the bickering camps the least bit

concerned about promoting cow protection. So what does Srila Prabhupada say

about cow protection?

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 8: Chapter Twenty-four, Text 5 :PURPORT

 

Without protection of cows, brahminical culture cannot be maintained;

and without brahminical culture, the aim of life cannot be fulfilled.

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 1: Chapter Nineteen, Text ; :PURPORT

 

Cow protection means feeding the brahminical culture, which leads towards

God consciousness, and thus perfection of human civilization is achieved.

 

That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That Mathura

without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all the

differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no connection to the

Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no plan to ever do so. They

want to have Krsna without cows.

 

Hence the wallowing.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> What kind of distinctions you mean? In terms of tattva, Lord Krishna and His

> expansions are nondifferent, no doubt. Yet there is a lot of difference in

> terms of rasa. That's why Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said:

>

> syamam eva param rupam

> puri madhu-puri vara

> vayah kaisorakam dhyeyam

> adya eva paro rasah

>

> TRANSLATION

>

> "The form of Syamasundara is the supreme form, the city of Mathura is the

> supreme abode, Lord Krsna's fresh youth should always be meditated upon,

> and the mellow of conjugal love is the supreme mellow.'"

>

> >>> Ref. VedaBase => Madhya 19.106

>

 

Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the

diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in the

city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They want the

recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the sampradayas, the

dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation like the above.

Unfortunately, this verse had no purport, so I looked for another one like it.

 

TRANSLATION

Since that time, the city of Mathura had been the capital of all the kings of

the Yadu dynasty. The city and district of Mathura are very intimately

connected

with Krsna, for Lord Krsna lives there eternally.

PURPORT

It is understood that Mathura City is the transcendental abode of Lord Krsna;

it

is not an ordinary material city, for it is eternally connected with the

Supreme

Personality of Godhead. Vrndavana is within the jurisdiction of Mathura, and it

still continues to exist. Because Mathura and Vrndavana are intimately

connected

with Krsna eternally, it is said that Lord Krsna never leaves Vrndavana

(vrndavanam parityajya padam ekam na gacchati). At present, the place known as

Vrndavana, in the district of Mathura, continues its position as a

transcendental place, and certainly anyone who goes there becomes

transcendentally purified.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 10.1.28

 

 

So from this, we can understand that the significance of Mathura is it's

relationship toVrindaban. It is the district as a whole that is auspicious.

and what is the special feature of Vrindaban? It is there that Krsna is with

the cows. So thinking that the Supreme Conception is Krsna without cows, is

lacking. And I don't see any one in all the bickering camps the least bit

concerned about promoting cow protection. So what does Srila Prabhupada say

about cow protection?

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 8: Chapter Twenty-four, Text 5 :PURPORT

 

Without protection of cows, brahminical culture cannot be maintained;

and without brahminical culture, the aim of life cannot be fulfilled.

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 1: Chapter Nineteen, Text ; :PURPORT

 

Cow protection means feeding the brahminical culture, which leads towards

God consciousness, and thus perfection of human civilization is achieved.

 

That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That Mathura

without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all the

differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no connection to the

Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no plan to ever do so. They

want to have Krsna without cows.

 

Hence the wallowing.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> What kind of distinctions you mean? In terms of tattva, Lord Krishna and His

> expansions are nondifferent, no doubt. Yet there is a lot of difference in

> terms of rasa. That's why Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said:

>

> syamam eva param rupam

> puri madhu-puri vara

> vayah kaisorakam dhyeyam

> adya eva paro rasah

>

> TRANSLATION

>

> "The form of Syamasundara is the supreme form, the city of Mathura is the

> supreme abode, Lord Krsna's fresh youth should always be meditated upon,

> and the mellow of conjugal love is the supreme mellow.'"

>

> >>> Ref. VedaBase => Madhya 19.106

>

 

Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the

diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in the

city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They want the

recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the sampradayas, the

dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation like the above.

Unfortunately, this verse had no purport, so I looked for another one like it.

 

TRANSLATION

Since that time, the city of Mathura had been the capital of all the kings of

the Yadu dynasty. The city and district of Mathura are very intimately

connected

with Krsna, for Lord Krsna lives there eternally.

PURPORT

It is understood that Mathura City is the transcendental abode of Lord Krsna;

it

is not an ordinary material city, for it is eternally connected with the

Supreme

Personality of Godhead. Vrndavana is within the jurisdiction of Mathura, and it

still continues to exist. Because Mathura and Vrndavana are intimately

connected

with Krsna eternally, it is said that Lord Krsna never leaves Vrndavana

(vrndavanam parityajya padam ekam na gacchati). At present, the place known as

Vrndavana, in the district of Mathura, continues its position as a

transcendental place, and certainly anyone who goes there becomes

transcendentally purified.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 10.1.28

 

 

So from this, we can understand that the significance of Mathura is it's

relationship toVrindaban. It is the district as a whole that is auspicious.

and what is the special feature of Vrindaban? It is there that Krsna is with

the cows. So thinking that the Supreme Conception is Krsna without cows, is

lacking. And I don't see any one in all the bickering camps the least bit

concerned about promoting cow protection. So what does Srila Prabhupada say

about cow protection?

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 8: Chapter Twenty-four, Text 5 :PURPORT

 

Without protection of cows, brahminical culture cannot be maintained;

and without brahminical culture, the aim of life cannot be fulfilled.

 

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 1: Chapter Nineteen, Text ; :PURPORT

 

Cow protection means feeding the brahminical culture, which leads towards

God consciousness, and thus perfection of human civilization is achieved.

 

That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That Mathura

without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all the

differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no connection to the

Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no plan to ever do so. They

want to have Krsna without cows.

 

Hence the wallowing.

[Guest guest]

On 19 Sep 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

> >

>

> Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation

like the above.

>

 

 

In that sense it might all be considered a form of hyperactive

intellectualism. Sometimes people take what they like from Krsna consciousness

and then use it as a prop to defend their incomplete appreciation, often

intertwined with the subtle message that 'I am better than you.' After all,

that is the theme of conditional life.

[Guest guest]

On 19 Sep 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

> >

>

> Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation

like the above.

>

 

 

In that sense it might all be considered a form of hyperactive

intellectualism. Sometimes people take what they like from Krsna consciousness

and then use it as a prop to defend their incomplete appreciation, often

intertwined with the subtle message that 'I am better than you.' After all,

that is the theme of conditional life.

[Guest guest]

On 19 Sep 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

> >

>

> Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem with

the diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial explanation

like the above.

>

 

 

In that sense it might all be considered a form of hyperactive

intellectualism. Sometimes people take what they like from Krsna consciousness

and then use it as a prop to defend their incomplete appreciation, often

intertwined with the subtle message that 'I am better than you.' After all,

that is the theme of conditional life.

[Guest guest]

> Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem

> with the

> diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

> the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

> want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

> sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial

> explanation like the above.

 

Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

discuss the philosophy? Or should I perhaps have subtracted Varnasrama

conference from my

comment?

[Guest guest]

> Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem

> with the

> diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

> the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

> want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

> sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial

> explanation like the above.

 

Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

discuss the philosophy? Or should I perhaps have subtracted Varnasrama

conference from my

comment?

[Guest guest]

On 18 Sep 1999, Krishna Susarla wrote:

>> I think a discussion on the relevant philosophical points is warranted,

provided everyone involved can participate in such a discussion without

labeling everyone else as insincere,

>rascal, mayavada...

 

That was precisely the purpose of my objection to the repeated reprinting and

republishing of Ravindra's (formely) private letter -- which I shall state it

again, was not only a breach of decorum but straight (if anything was

"straight" about it) sadhu-ninda.

 

 

> > What I'm talking about is comments like, "in ISKCON, they are only

> > interested in Rama, Narasimha" or some such condescending nonsense.

>

 

Careful, Prabhu, because your strong comment, "CONDESCENDING NONSENSE" also

verges on an *ad hominem*, and considering to whom its aimed at, constitutes a

form of SADHU-NINDA. If I were to declare that something Prabhupada said was

"nonsense," wouldn't you take that as "offensive"? Hopefully, everyone on

this conference would raise their objection to such an UNCOUTH and RECKLESS

comment by me or anyone else.

 

So please watch your step, Prabhu, because you are walking on thin ice.

You talk about maintaining a "relevant philosophical discussion," but then you

go straight away and throw out your own brand of pejorative.

 

If you deem that I have gone out of my way to unnecessary lambaste Ravindra in

my posting, then I am open for correction. Please explain where or how I have

erred.

 

Despite the defects in my response, however, everyone must know the "straight"

fact is that Ravindra has committed a great blunder. Those who repost his

(private) letter and even those who *read* it without objecting -- at least

within their minds -- also become implicated in that offense.

 

You talk of "philosophy," Prabhu. This is our BASIC Gaudiya Vaisnava

philosophy. I urge you to become more acquainted with it before you take your

comments any further.

 

To repeat, bona fide "doubts" are one thing; to inapproriately express and

propagate them is another.

 

Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu has not simply raised philosophical doubts but has

spun a thinly veiled character assasination of a senior Vaisnava. Even if RSP

was my own guru, it would be my duty to inform him he has erred. There is a

specified etiquette to follow in doing that of course, but do it I must. I

wouldn't be a bona fide disciple if I didn't.

 

Adopting Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu's logic, I could also say something about his

past on the plea of having "doubts about his being an advanced Vaisnava." But

this is not "philosophy"; it is my personal opinion.

 

If I insist and claim that it is important for everyone to know about Ravindra

Svarupa's character flaws as a matter for everyone's spiritual welfare, then I

am in the realm of *legislating faith.* In that case, I had better actually

KNOW what I am talking about (ie, I must be a self-realized soul and receiving

direct dictation from Krsna) or I had better keep my remarks within a small

circle of enlightened friends, who would hopefully correct any wayward

understandings. Otherwise, I am getting into big trouble and committing

SADHU-NINDA, or Vaisnava-aparadha by this so-called airing of doubts about a

senior Vaisnava.

 

If we want speak philosophy, that is fine. But let's do that without acrimony

or rancor, and above all, let's avoid slandering senior Vaisnavas.

 

I hope everyone now understands the seriousness of my point. There is nothing

so devastating to our spiritual progress as committing Vaisnava-aparadha.

 

Humbly,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

"COM: Mundita Mastaka (das) (NE-BBT Russian)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2639236 from COM]

>

> > Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem

> > with the

> > diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

> > the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

> > want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

> > sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial

> > explanation like the above.

>

> Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

> discuss the philosophy?

 

It is the context in which it is discussed. It's like putting the cart in

front of the ox. It's like discussing the socialogical roots of poverty while

someone is staving to death in front of you. It's like jnani yoga instead of

bhakti yoga.

[Guest guest]

"COM: Mundita Mastaka (das) (NE-BBT Russian)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2639236 from COM]

>

> > Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem

> > with the

> > diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

> > the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

> > want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

> > sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial

> > explanation like the above.

>

> Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

> discuss the philosophy?

 

It is the context in which it is discussed. It's like putting the cart in

front of the ox. It's like discussing the socialogical roots of poverty while

someone is staving to death in front of you. It's like jnani yoga instead of

bhakti yoga.

[Guest guest]

"COM: Mundita Mastaka (das) (NE-BBT Russian)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2639236 from COM]

>

> > Now here you are getting into what I see as an across the board problem

> > with the

> > diksas, the rittviks, and the Gaudiya math types. They want Krsna in

> > the city of Mathura. They want philosopical paradigms as solutions. They

> > want the recipies of Vaisnavism, the books, the philosophy, the

> > sampradayas, the dress, etc. And they justify it with a partial

> > explanation like the above.

>

> Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

> discuss the philosophy?

 

It is the context in which it is discussed. It's like putting the cart in

front of the ox. It's like discussing the socialogical roots of poverty while

someone is staving to death in front of you. It's like jnani yoga instead of

bhakti yoga.

[Guest guest]

> That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That

> Mathura without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all

> the differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no

> connection to the Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no

> plan to ever do so. They want to have Krsna without cows.

>

> Hence the wallowing.

 

So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

Srila Prabhupada sums it up nicely:

 

(18) 760708ed.wdc V0l 23 P.269:And in His practical life He played as a

cowherd boy giving protection to other cows. There is a picture, Krsna is

sitting, and the cow and the calf is feeling very safety. Krsna is

embracing. So because we want to be Krsna conscious, we want to follow His

personal behavior and instruction.<p>

 

I was chanting Japa a while back, and I picked up an old Brijbasi print of

Krsna embracing the cows, and it was just so nice to see those cows looking

lovingly into Krsna's moon-like face, drinking it like nectar, and I had

this feeling of looking forward to actualy owning a cow, and treating her

like my own child. On ISCOWP's web page there are some nice photos, there is

one with a devotee and two ox calves just coming out of the forest in the

snow. Those calves are so appealing. They respond to love just as we do, but

they are silent. These animals are highly evolved, and very intelligent, the

pain they feel when neglected is exactly like that of an orphaned child.

 

We should want as Srila Prabhupada suggests, and once we are sitting with

the nicely protected cows, once each devotee who claims to be a brahmin has

done his best to try to care for cows (in whatever way possible) *then* we

can start to churn these deeper tattvas. If we dont do this, will Krsna ever

be pleased with us?

 

Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Your Servant

Samba das

[Guest guest]

> That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That

> Mathura without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all

> the differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no

> connection to the Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no

> plan to ever do so. They want to have Krsna without cows.

>

> Hence the wallowing.

 

So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

Srila Prabhupada sums it up nicely:

 

(18) 760708ed.wdc V0l 23 P.269:And in His practical life He played as a

cowherd boy giving protection to other cows. There is a picture, Krsna is

sitting, and the cow and the calf is feeling very safety. Krsna is

embracing. So because we want to be Krsna conscious, we want to follow His

personal behavior and instruction.<p>

 

I was chanting Japa a while back, and I picked up an old Brijbasi print of

Krsna embracing the cows, and it was just so nice to see those cows looking

lovingly into Krsna's moon-like face, drinking it like nectar, and I had

this feeling of looking forward to actualy owning a cow, and treating her

like my own child. On ISCOWP's web page there are some nice photos, there is

one with a devotee and two ox calves just coming out of the forest in the

snow. Those calves are so appealing. They respond to love just as we do, but

they are silent. These animals are highly evolved, and very intelligent, the

pain they feel when neglected is exactly like that of an orphaned child.

 

We should want as Srila Prabhupada suggests, and once we are sitting with

the nicely protected cows, once each devotee who claims to be a brahmin has

done his best to try to care for cows (in whatever way possible) *then* we

can start to churn these deeper tattvas. If we dont do this, will Krsna ever

be pleased with us?

 

Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Your Servant

Samba das

[Guest guest]

> That brahminical culture without cow protection is incomplete. That

> Mathura without Vrindaban is incomplete. So it doesn't surprise me, all

> the differences and arguing, because at the root, they have no

> connection to the Earth, no connection to the cows, and seemingly no

> plan to ever do so. They want to have Krsna without cows.

>

> Hence the wallowing.

 

So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

Srila Prabhupada sums it up nicely:

 

(18) 760708ed.wdc V0l 23 P.269:And in His practical life He played as a

cowherd boy giving protection to other cows. There is a picture, Krsna is

sitting, and the cow and the calf is feeling very safety. Krsna is

embracing. So because we want to be Krsna conscious, we want to follow His

personal behavior and instruction.<p>

 

I was chanting Japa a while back, and I picked up an old Brijbasi print of

Krsna embracing the cows, and it was just so nice to see those cows looking

lovingly into Krsna's moon-like face, drinking it like nectar, and I had

this feeling of looking forward to actualy owning a cow, and treating her

like my own child. On ISCOWP's web page there are some nice photos, there is

one with a devotee and two ox calves just coming out of the forest in the

snow. Those calves are so appealing. They respond to love just as we do, but

they are silent. These animals are highly evolved, and very intelligent, the

pain they feel when neglected is exactly like that of an orphaned child.

 

We should want as Srila Prabhupada suggests, and once we are sitting with

the nicely protected cows, once each devotee who claims to be a brahmin has

done his best to try to care for cows (in whatever way possible) *then* we

can start to churn these deeper tattvas. If we dont do this, will Krsna ever

be pleased with us?

 

Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Your Servant

Samba das

[Guest guest]

> So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

 

> Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Yes, perfectly right! If we just talk and discuss then as Srila Prabhupada

said ""This chanting should go on. Instead of meetings,

resolutions, dissolutions, revolutions, and then no solutions, there should

be chanting."============ REF. SP Lilamrta Ch. 49: India: Unifying ISKCON

 

Of course we need such discussions as Krsna Katha, but we are not babaji but

gostyanandi, so we have so many things to do in our Movement.

 

ys Dvarkadhis das

 

ps Dandabats to Srila Trivikram Maharaj if you meet him now on Mauriotius.

[Guest guest]

> So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

 

> Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Yes, perfectly right! If we just talk and discuss then as Srila Prabhupada

said ""This chanting should go on. Instead of meetings,

resolutions, dissolutions, revolutions, and then no solutions, there should

be chanting."============ REF. SP Lilamrta Ch. 49: India: Unifying ISKCON

 

Of course we need such discussions as Krsna Katha, but we are not babaji but

gostyanandi, so we have so many things to do in our Movement.

 

ys Dvarkadhis das

 

ps Dandabats to Srila Trivikram Maharaj if you meet him now on Mauriotius.

[Guest guest]

> So true, what is the use of all this posturing if we cannot be practical.

 

> Let us be practical first, and do something while we still have energy.

 

Yes, perfectly right! If we just talk and discuss then as Srila Prabhupada

said ""This chanting should go on. Instead of meetings,

resolutions, dissolutions, revolutions, and then no solutions, there should

be chanting."============ REF. SP Lilamrta Ch. 49: India: Unifying ISKCON

 

Of course we need such discussions as Krsna Katha, but we are not babaji but

gostyanandi, so we have so many things to do in our Movement.

 

ys Dvarkadhis das

 

ps Dandabats to Srila Trivikram Maharaj if you meet him now on Mauriotius.

[Guest guest]

> I hope everyone now understands the seriousness of my point. There is

> nothing so devastating to our spiritual progress as committing

> Vaisnava-aparadha.

 

Prabhu, please protect us against sadhu-ninda. We are group-conscious, low

class and less intelligent. We are materially motivated and cannot

understand real advanced sadhus. If you speak us about Narayana Maharaja,

we´ll commit offenses for sure. So don´t come here to preach his glories,

unless you want to harm us. We´ll not appreciate and you will be responsible

for our offenses. That´s the Ninth Offense against the Holy Name on your

side.

I´m serious also. When I read Ravindra Svarupa´s letter I become joyful, I

cannot avoid it. I find his arguments better than yours, clear and sound.

And you don´t counteract his arguments, only prevents us against offense.

So, please, if you are convinced that thinking otherwise is offensive,

please have mercy and don´t come to us.

 

Ys

Bhagavata-Purana Dasa

[Guest guest]

On 20 Sep 1999, Bhagavata-purana das wrote:

> Prabhu, please protect us against sadhu-ninda. We are group-conscious, low

class and less intelligent. We are materially motivated and cannot

> understand real advanced sadhus.

 

This type of false humility is facetious and really has no place in a

conference purportedly discussing Krsna-katha. Prabhupada states (Bg purpt

10th chapt) that genuine spiritual discussions (krsna-katha) can take place

"only amongst those who are *serious*," not otherwise. Either we speak

truthfully and straightforwardly or better we don't speak at all. Falsetto

overtones will not advance anyone's enlightenment or devotional mood.

 

This sort of facetious humor as you are employing in regards to senior

Vaisnavas -- feigned submission -- was also used by Samba and the other sons

of Krsna towards great sages. Although Samba & Co. were the direct sons of

Krsna, the result from their offense was the destruction of the entire Yadu

dynasty. Following a similar path, ISKCON is now faced with two major court

cases (Calcutta and the upcoming class-action lawsuit) which together threaten

to wreak havoc if not dissolve the whole institution worldwide.

 

We can understand that the root cause of these catastrophes is due to serious

vaisnava-aparadhas perpetrated in ISKCON by the leadership and their cohorts

over many years to different degrees against hundreds if not thousands of

devotees at various levels -- seniors in the Gaudiya Maths, equals as

Godbrothers/sisters, and subordinates as grand-disciples and children -- in

the form of child abuse, beatings, banishment, harrassment, cheating, power,

manipulation and control, etc. The "corporate culture" thus engendered from

these offenses -- offenses that have been tolerated if not directly sponsored

or condoned by the ISKCON leadership and passed down through the chain of

command as the accepted status quo -- has created the situation we find ISKCON

in today -- disasters and emergencies striking on all fronts. You may find

some perverted humor in all this, but any serious devotee should be crying. In

any case, it is no laughing matter. I suggest your humor here is perverse and

inappropriate.

 

> If you speak us about Narayana Maharaja, we´ll commit offenses for sure. So

don´t come here to preach his glories, unless you want to harm us. We´ll not

appreciate and you will be responsible for our offenses. That´s the Ninth

Offense against the Holy Name on your side.

 

The "harm" you discern is already upon ISKCON's head, as stated above. The

offenses have been growing and maturing for twenty-some years. Someone tries

to inform us of the imminent dangers of continuing in this present course of

action and we get angry... What can I say?

 

 

As far as "philosophical differences," between the Gaudiya Maths (and in

particular, Narayan Maharaja) and ISKCON, I suggest everyone learn to see

things more *philosophically* rather than emotionally or sentimentally

("group-consciousness"). In other words, let us first genuinely hear what the

other party has to say before rooting for the home team and passing judgment

upon anyone else who differs from the established doctrines as an

enemy/outcaste.

 

The process of becoming Krsna conscious is not like a kangaroo court or

televised political campaign and the person with the most popular opinion

wins. KC demands earnest philosophical inquiry and constant truth-seeking. We

must always remember that each one of us is individually responsible for the

reactions to our own thoughts and actions. Ultimately, we have to "fly our

own airplanes." We would be advised to actually know how to fly our "plane"

better than JFK junior did (he crashed into the sea flying in cloudy weather).

Owning the latest state-of the art model didn't save him because he couldn't

properly operate the hi-tech controls. By the same token, mere toting the

party line in a large organization won't guarantee our spirituality over a

confusing issue.

 

Go ahead, clear your doubts. But unless we have sufficiently investigated and

heard Narayan Maharaja explanations, how can we dare to speak air our thoughts

so self-righteously? We are just full of opinion, that's all.

 

To Krishna Susharla: We can't speak of "philosophy" unless we are prepared to

follow the process of obtaining truth. Payonidhi Prabhu used to be of a

similar persuasion ("opinion") against Narayan Maharaja, influenced no doubt

by the negative attitudes he imbibed in ISKCON and promoted by his former

(fallen) guru. But after a fair hearing of Narayan Maharaja, Payonidhi Prabhu

was turned around and accepted him as a bona fide exponent of truth --

as *guru*, "one who dispels ignorance". I was also initially skeptical, as

were so many others. A saint is understood by hearing, honest and sincere

inquiry -- not by challenge, and what to speak of insult.

 

 

> I´m serious also. When I read Ravindra Svarupa´s letter I become joyful, I

cannot avoid it. I find his arguments better than yours, clear and sound.

 

 

If someone is unable to discern the impropriety in Ravindra's letter "Taking

Srila Prabhupada Straight", then I suggest they at least do as Vrndavan dasa

Thakura recommends in Caitanya Bhagavat and see it as a "pastime." Vrndavan

dasa Thakura explains that if we witness a controversy between advanced

Vaisnavas and inappropriately take sides, criticizing the other party, we are

committing Vaisnava aparadha against the other Vaisnava.

 

If we are unable to disciminate or if we are a subordinate, then we are in no

position to pass judgment. Whatever the case, there is no cause for feeling

"joy" when there are misunderstandings between Vaisnavas. It is unfortunate.

 

If we feel any "joy" over learning about the faults in any Vaisnava -- be that

a lowly new "bhakta," one of our most prominent leaders in ISKCON, or

whomever -- what does that say about our own character, especially if these

accusations were inaccurate or overblown hearsay to begin with?

 

 

> And you don´t counteract his arguments, only prevents us against offense.

So, please, if you are convinced that thinking otherwise is offensive, please

have mercy and don´t come to us.

 

Is this what you have learned from your "authorities": if someone disagrees

with me, I exclude them? "Get out from here!" And if I have the power, I kick

them out of ISKCON?

 

Is this then your idea of a "superior philosophy" -- *argumentum ad vaculum*,

"the power of the stick"? Because that is precisely what Ravindra Svarupa did

to the recipient of this very letter -- removed him from ISKCON. I think we

have seen far too much of this kind of "philosophy" over the years. I again

refer to my opening paragraphs, because it is all too relevant to the matter

at hand. Vaisnava-aparadhas have been perpetrated across the board to any and

all contenders or dissenters. This is ISKCON's practical application of

"philosophy".

 

On one point, though, I would agree with Bhagavata-purana Prabhu: under such

strained conditions and relationships, honest discussion is indeed difficult

if not impossible to continue.

 

But my final question is simply this: who created these INTOLERABLE conditions

to begin with?

 

I will leave it for my more enlightened readers to supply the answer.

 

I don't think I need to recount the history; a lot of this will come out in

the upcoming class-action court case sponsored by the gurukulis. How utterly

tragic all of this is. But a fool feels no remorse.

 

 

Speaking frankly,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

> Is this then your idea of a "superior philosophy" -- *argumentum ad

> vaculum*, "the power of the stick"? Because that is precisely what

> Ravindra Svarupa did to the recipient of this very letter -- removed him

> from ISKCON.

 

So, what do you propose? Substitute the GBC body for Narayana Maharaja?

Sure, that´s the only way to peace. Everybody will agree.

 

Ys

Bhagavata-Purana Dasa

[Guest guest]

Dear devotees:

please accept my humble obeisances. All the glories to Srila

Prabhupada.

 

For my condicional point of view, Krsna katha means speaking only Krsna

pastimes and sastras.

Gaudiya math, Narayana Maharaja, and ISKCON managing issues isn't Krsna

katha, and surely lots of us will have differents and opposse points of

view, and may be all we can be wrong or right at the same time, and will be

a good thing to avoid commiting offenses one each other.

Srila Prabhupada advice us, that when Guru and Sadhu have different points

of view sastra has the LAST words, so I humble request to all of KRSNA

KATHA conference member to come back to the katha and change the way of the

conversation.

 

I am ISKCON member and I am not so interest in what had happened on the

issues mencioned below, I cann't solve those issues because I ain't having

a managing service, if someone of you disagree then he/she can send his

complain letter to the managing devotees, but again I humble request to

those devotees that are trying to introduce those topics here to abstain.

 

ys, Sridhari devi dasi

 

 

 

----------

> De: WWW: Srila (Dasa) ACBSP (Berkeley CA - USA)

<cirvin (AT) uclink4 (DOT) berkeley.edu>

> A: COM: (Krsna) Katha <Katha (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; Krishna Susarla

<krishna (AT) tumora (DOT) swmed.edu>

> Asunto: Re: Taking Srila Prabhupada Srtaight

> Fecha: Lunes 20 de Septiembre de 1999 23:00

>

> [Text 2642530 from COM]

>

> On 20 Sep 1999, Bhagavata-purana das wrote:

> > Prabhu, please protect us against sadhu-ninda. We are group-conscious,

low

> class and less intelligent. We are materially motivated and cannot

> > understand real advanced sadhus.

>

> This type of false humility is facetious and really has no place in a

> conference purportedly discussing Krsna-katha. Prabhupada states (Bg

purpt

> 10th chapt) that genuine spiritual discussions (krsna-katha) can take

place

> "only amongst those who are *serious*," not otherwise. Either we speak

> truthfully and straightforwardly or better we don't speak at all.

Falsetto

> overtones will not advance anyone's enlightenment or devotional mood.

>

> This sort of facetious humor as you are employing in regards to senior

> Vaisnavas -- feigned submission -- was also used by Samba and the other

sons

> of Krsna towards great sages. Although Samba & Co. were the direct sons

of

> Krsna, the result from their offense was the destruction of the entire

Yadu

> dynasty. Following a similar path, ISKCON is now faced with two major

court

> cases (Calcutta and the upcoming class-action lawsuit) which together

threaten

> to wreak havoc if not dissolve the whole institution worldwide.

>

> We can understand that the root cause of these catastrophes is due to

serious

> vaisnava-aparadhas perpetrated in ISKCON by the leadership and their

cohorts

> over many years to different degrees against hundreds if not thousands of

> devotees at various levels -- seniors in the Gaudiya Maths, equals as

> Godbrothers/sisters, and subordinates as grand-disciples and children --

in

> the form of child abuse, beatings, banishment, harrassment, cheating,

power,

> manipulation and control, etc. The "corporate culture" thus engendered

from

> these offenses -- offenses that have been tolerated if not directly

sponsored

> or condoned by the ISKCON leadership and passed down through the chain of

> command as the accepted status quo -- has created the situation we find

ISKCON

> in today -- disasters and emergencies striking on all fronts. You may

find

> some perverted humor in all this, but any serious devotee should be

crying. In

> any case, it is no laughing matter. I suggest your humor here is perverse

and

> inappropriate.

>

> > If you speak us about Narayana Maharaja, we´ll commit offenses for

sure. So

> don´t come here to preach his glories, unless you want to harm us. We´ll

not

> appreciate and you will be responsible for our offenses. That´s the Ninth

> Offense against the Holy Name on your side.

>

> The "harm" you discern is already upon ISKCON's head, as stated above.

The

> offenses have been growing and maturing for twenty-some years. Someone

tries

> to inform us of the imminent dangers of continuing in this present course

of

> action and we get angry... What can I say?

>

>

> As far as "philosophical differences," between the Gaudiya Maths (and in

> particular, Narayan Maharaja) and ISKCON, I suggest everyone learn to see

> things more *philosophically* rather than emotionally or sentimentally

> ("group-consciousness"). In other words, let us first genuinely hear what

the

> other party has to say before rooting for the home team and passing

judgment

> upon anyone else who differs from the established doctrines as an

> enemy/outcaste.

>

> The process of becoming Krsna conscious is not like a kangaroo court or

> televised political campaign and the person with the most popular opinion

> wins. KC demands earnest philosophical inquiry and constant

truth-seeking. We

> must always remember that each one of us is individually responsible for

the

> reactions to our own thoughts and actions. Ultimately, we have to "fly

our

> own airplanes." We would be advised to actually know how to fly our

"plane"

> better than JFK junior did (he crashed into the sea flying in cloudy

weather).

> Owning the latest state-of the art model didn't save him because he

couldn't

> properly operate the hi-tech controls. By the same token, mere toting the

> party line in a large organization won't guarantee our spirituality over

a

> confusing issue.

>

> Go ahead, clear your doubts. But unless we have sufficiently investigated

and

> heard Narayan Maharaja explanations, how can we dare to speak air our

thoughts

> so self-righteously? We are just full of opinion, that's all.

>

> To Krishna Susharla: We can't speak of "philosophy" unless we are

prepared to

> follow the process of obtaining truth. Payonidhi Prabhu used to be of a

> similar persuasion ("opinion") against Narayan Maharaja, influenced no

doubt

> by the negative attitudes he imbibed in ISKCON and promoted by his former

> (fallen) guru. But after a fair hearing of Narayan Maharaja, Payonidhi

Prabhu

> was turned around and accepted him as a bona fide exponent of truth --

> as *guru*, "one who dispels ignorance". I was also initially skeptical,

as

> were so many others. A saint is understood by hearing, honest and

sincere

> inquiry -- not by challenge, and what to speak of insult.

>

>

> > I´m serious also. When I read Ravindra Svarupa´s letter I become

joyful, I

> cannot avoid it. I find his arguments better than yours, clear and sound.

>

>

> If someone is unable to discern the impropriety in Ravindra's letter

"Taking

> Srila Prabhupada Straight", then I suggest they at least do as Vrndavan

dasa

> Thakura recommends in Caitanya Bhagavat and see it as a "pastime."

Vrndavan

> dasa Thakura explains that if we witness a controversy between advanced

> Vaisnavas and inappropriately take sides, criticizing the other party, we

are

> committing Vaisnava aparadha against the other Vaisnava.

>

> If we are unable to disciminate or if we are a subordinate, then we are

in no

> position to pass judgment. Whatever the case, there is no cause for

feeling

> "joy" when there are misunderstandings between Vaisnavas. It is

unfortunate.

>

> If we feel any "joy" over learning about the faults in any Vaisnava -- be

that

> a lowly new "bhakta," one of our most prominent leaders in ISKCON, or

> whomever -- what does that say about our own character, especially if

these

> accusations were inaccurate or overblown hearsay to begin with?

>

>

> > And you don´t counteract his arguments, only prevents us against

offense.

> So, please, if you are convinced that thinking otherwise is offensive,

please

> have mercy and don´t come to us.

>

> Is this what you have learned from your "authorities": if someone

disagrees

> with me, I exclude them? "Get out from here!" And if I have the power, I

kick

> them out of ISKCON?

>

> Is this then your idea of a "superior philosophy" -- *argumentum ad

vaculum*,

> "the power of the stick"? Because that is precisely what Ravindra Svarupa

did

> to the recipient of this very letter -- removed him from ISKCON. I think

we

> have seen far too much of this kind of "philosophy" over the years. I

again

> refer to my opening paragraphs, because it is all too relevant to the

matter

> at hand. Vaisnava-aparadhas have been perpetrated across the board to

any and

> all contenders or dissenters. This is ISKCON's practical application of

> "philosophy".

>

> On one point, though, I would agree with Bhagavata-purana Prabhu: under

such

> strained conditions and relationships, honest discussion is indeed

difficult

> if not impossible to continue.

>

> But my final question is simply this: who created these INTOLERABLE

conditions

> to begin with?

>

> I will leave it for my more enlightened readers to supply the answer.

>

> I don't think I need to recount the history; a lot of this will come out

in

> the upcoming class-action court case sponsored by the gurukulis. How

utterly

> tragic all of this is. But a fool feels no remorse.

>

>

> Speaking frankly,

>

> Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

> > Everybody has his own problems, but why is it necessarily a problem to

> > discuss the philosophy?

>

> It is the context in which it is discussed. It's like putting the cart

> in front of the ox. It's like discussing the socialogical roots of

> poverty while someone is staving to death in front of you. It's like

> jnani yoga instead of bhakti yoga.

 

Prabhu, if you say that discussing topics related directly to Krishna is

jnana yoga then please share with me what is your conception of bhakti yoga.

And also what is your realization of the difference between aropa-siddhi

bhakti and svarupa-siddhi bhakti.

 

I have seen so many devotees dying spiritually out of "spiritual

starvation", without taste to hari-katha and hari-nama, because they do not

have real sadhu-sanga and were never taught properly to think and speak

about Krishna. Thus I find trying to speak of Krishna more practical for me

than speaking of cow protection or any other thing in the category of aropa

siddhi bhakti. After all, we should see our sadhya or prayojana clearly in

order to choose the proper sadhana. And we should determine first what is

our ox and what is the cart.

 

If there is any further comment please send it to me in a PRIVATE letter.

 

ys