Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

See all matajis like this

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

At 14:57 -0800 1/1/99, COM: (Bhakta) Oleg Demtchenko (Nikolaev - RU) wrote:

>[Text 1981313 from COM]

>

>> "While the calf, ever butting with its head, one knee slightly bent, and

>> its tail ever moving prettily, sucks its mother's udder whence the milk

>> drips, the cow, lowing softly in delight at her child, licks the upturned

>> face of the young one whose mouth is flecked by spots from her milk."

>

>You mean we all should look at matajis as a calf looks on his cow mother?

>But we shouldn't expect milk from them, should we?

 

No. Besides, staring at women's breasts on the pretense of imitating a

calf is udderly ridiculous.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> At 14:57 -0800 1/1/99, COM: (Bhakta) Oleg Demtchenko (Nikolaev - RU)

> wrote:

> >[Text 1981313 from COM]

> >

> >> "While the calf, ever butting with its head, one knee slightly bent,

> >> and its tail ever moving prettily, sucks its mother's udder whence the

> >> milk drips, the cow, lowing softly in delight at her child, licks the

> >> upturned face of the young one whose mouth is flecked by spots from her

> >> milk."

> >

> >You mean we all should look at matajis as a calf looks on his cow mother?

> >But we shouldn't expect milk from them, should we?

>

> No. Besides, staring at women's breasts on the pretense of imitating a

> calf is udderly ridiculous.

>

> Ys,

> Madhusudani dasi

 

How about expecting motherly affection?

 

ys KKdas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>> >You mean we all should look at matajis as a calf looks on his cow mother?

>> >But we shouldn't expect milk from them, should we?

>>

>> No. Besides, staring at women's breasts on the pretense of imitating a

>> calf is udderly ridiculous.

>>

>> Ys,

>> Madhusudani dasi

>

>How about expecting motherly affection?

 

Absolutely. Devotee men who treat devotee women respectfully as mothers

should expect to be treated with motherly affection. However, I can tell

you that few mothers would respond with affection if their sons started

calling them whores, nazis and niggers. Both parties thus have to honor

the mother-son relationship for it to work. I'm also certain that

Prabhupada did not expect the men to be staring at the women's breasts,

just like he certainly wouldn't expect us to toilet train you either. :-)

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

ps. please don't add any additional conference to your reply this time, my

dear son. Thank you for respecting my wishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Fri, 1 Jan 1999, COM: (Bhakta) Greg Harraz (San Jose, CA - USA) wrote:

> Great words! What is the exact source of this quote?

I believe it's from the SubhASitAvalI of MayUra. I made no attempt

to improve upon A.B. Kieth's translation (in his _History of Sanskrit

Literature_, pg. 212). To my knowledge, MayUra isn't considered a pure

vaiSNava, but this verse is certainly appreciable to any human being,

whoever wrote it. However, it's also a fact that MayUra has been quoted

copiously by RUpa GosvAmI in his anthology PadyAvalI, so it seems that

he thought highly of MAyUra's writing, if nothing else. I think the

auspicious picture this verse produces in the mind can help to purify

one's material existence. We all know how important it is to become pious

(GItA, 7.28); perhaps more thoughts like this may help us effect this.

What does it actually mean? Well, let's remember, poetry is

subjective, and good poetry always accomodates many interpretations. In

fact, most Vedic literature, including even the BhAgavatam, is also

poetry. Those who vociferously assert their views about it may do well to

remember this fact. As far as I'm concerned, this verse is the picture

of motherhood, vAtsalya. This very word for maternal affection is derived

from the word, "vatsa," calf. In Vedic culture, the love of a cow for her

calf is thus considered to be the paragon of motherly love, or even of

love in general, since the purest love in this world is maternal love. It

will do us good to consider all these things when we call someone our

mother; that word carries all the superlative respect as does the term

"prabhu." Hence, I said see all matajis like this.

 

Hare Krishna.

 

MDd

 

 

> > AhatyAhatya-mUrdhnA drutam anupibataH prasnutaM mAtur UdhaH kiJcit

> > kuJcaika-jAnor anavarata-calac-cAru-pucchasya dhenuH uttIrNaM tarNakasya

> > priya-tanayatayA datta-huGkAra-mudrA

> > visraGsi-kSIra-dhArA-lavazabala-mukhasyAGgam AtRpti leDhi

> >

> > "While the calf, ever butting with its head, one knee slightly bent, and

> > its tail ever moving prettily, sucks its mother's udder whence the milk

> > drips, the cow, lowing softly in delight at her child, licks the upturned

> > face of the young one whose mouth is flecked by spots from her milk."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mukunda Datta prabhu,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances,

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

 

In response to your information about motherly affection,

your words were very much appreciated. I hope that everyone

takes your message to heart!

 

On the other hand, your inference that the Vedic literature (you

mentioned Srimad Bhagavatam specifically) is poetry, and therefore

accomodating to many interpretations is strange, to say the least.

Perhaps you did not mean exactly what you said?

 

---"M. Tandy" <mpt@u.washington.edu> wrote:

> What does it actually mean? Well, let's remember, poetry is

> subjective, and good poetry always accomodates many interpretations.

> In fact, most Vedic literature, including even the BhAgavatam, is

> also poetry. Those who vociferously assert their views about it may

> do well to remember this fact.

 

I do not believe that this is Srila Prabhupada's mood, do you? Srila

Prabhupada was clear that there was only one interpretation of Vedic

literature, and that is the interpretation which leads the reader to

the knowledge of the Supreme Lord Krsna.

 

"Therefore we have published this Bhagavad-gita. It is the essence of

all Vedic literature, Bhagavad-gita as it is. You have to learn

Bhagavad-gita as it is. Don't interpret in your own way. There is no

possibility. But people do it, and foolish persons, they accept it.

No, there is no question of interpretation."

(Lecture at Int. Student Society-Boston, May 3, 1969)

 

Have I misunderstood your words? If so, would you care to clarify your

position so that I may be corrected?

 

your humble servant

 

Devarsi Muni dasa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Mukunda Datta prabhu,

 

Please accept my humble obeisances,

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

 

In response to your information about motherly affection,

your words were very much appreciated. I hope that everyone

takes your message to heart!

 

On the other hand, your inference that the Vedic literature (you

mentioned Srimad Bhagavatam specifically) is poetry, and therefore

accomodating to many interpretations is strange, to say the least.

Perhaps you did not mean exactly what you said?

 

---"M. Tandy" <mpt@u.washington.edu> wrote:

> What does it actually mean? Well, let's remember, poetry is

> subjective, and good poetry always accomodates many interpretations.

> In fact, most Vedic literature, including even the BhAgavatam, is

> also poetry. Those who vociferously assert their views about it may

> do well to remember this fact.

 

I do not believe that this is Srila Prabhupada's mood, do you? Srila

Prabhupada was clear that there was only one interpretation of Vedic

literature, and that is the interpretation which leads the reader to

the knowledge of the Supreme Lord Krsna.

 

"Therefore we have published this Bhagavad-gita. It is the essence of

all Vedic literature, Bhagavad-gita as it is. You have to learn

Bhagavad-gita as it is. Don't interpret in your own way. There is no

possibility. But people do it, and foolish persons, they accept it.

No, there is no question of interpretation."

(Lecture at Int. Student Society-Boston, May 3, 1969)

 

Have I misunderstood your words? If so, would you care to clarify your

position so that I may be corrected?

 

your humble servant

 

Devarsi Muni dasa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, COM: Devarsi Muni (das) VMS (Crescent City, CA - USA)

wrote:

> Please accept my humble obeisances,

> All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

Please accept my respectful obeisances. Jaya Prabhupada!

 

 

> In response to your information about motherly affection,

> your words were very much appreciated. I hope that everyone

> takes your message to heart!

Thanks for your encouraging words!

 

 

> On the other hand, your inference that the Vedic literature (you

> mentioned Srimad Bhagavatam specifically) is poetry, and therefore

> accomodating to many interpretations is strange, to say the least.

> Perhaps you did not mean exactly what you said?

> ---"M. Tandy" <mpt@u.washington.edu> wrote:

> > What does it actually mean? Well, let's remember, poetry is

> > subjective, and good poetry always accomodates many interpretations.

> > In fact, most Vedic literature, including even the BhAgavatam, is

> > also poetry. Those who vociferously assert their views about it may

> > do well to remember this fact.

> I do not believe that this is Srila Prabhupada's mood, do you? Srila

> Prabhupada was clear that there was only one interpretation of Vedic

> literature, and that is the interpretation which leads the reader to

> the knowledge of the Supreme Lord Krsna.

Of course. No, I didn't mean to question this at all. I was

suggesting authoritative interpretations of relatively minor importance.

 

 

> "Therefore we have published this Bhagavad-gita. It is the essence of

> all Vedic literature, Bhagavad-gita as it is. You have to learn

> Bhagavad-gita as it is. Don't interpret in your own way. There is no

> possibility. But people do it, and foolish persons, they accept it.

> No, there is no question of interpretation."

> (Lecture at Int. Student Society-Boston, May 3, 1969)

> Have I misunderstood your words? If so, would you care to clarify your

> position so that I may be corrected?

I was just trying to point out that whether we agree with someone

else's interpretation or not, it IS possible to interpret the BhAgavata,

etc., in slightly different ways. The importance of this fact is that even

among vaiSNavas, there are differences of opinion which guru/sAdhu/zAstra

can accommodate. I think this is extremely relevant nowadays. Sorry if I

confused anyone.

 

MDd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, COM: Devarsi Muni (das) VMS (Crescent City, CA - USA)

wrote:

> Please accept my humble obeisances,

> All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

Please accept my respectful obeisances. Jaya Prabhupada!

 

 

> In response to your information about motherly affection,

> your words were very much appreciated. I hope that everyone

> takes your message to heart!

Thanks for your encouraging words!

 

 

> On the other hand, your inference that the Vedic literature (you

> mentioned Srimad Bhagavatam specifically) is poetry, and therefore

> accomodating to many interpretations is strange, to say the least.

> Perhaps you did not mean exactly what you said?

> ---"M. Tandy" <mpt@u.washington.edu> wrote:

> > What does it actually mean? Well, let's remember, poetry is

> > subjective, and good poetry always accomodates many interpretations.

> > In fact, most Vedic literature, including even the BhAgavatam, is

> > also poetry. Those who vociferously assert their views about it may

> > do well to remember this fact.

> I do not believe that this is Srila Prabhupada's mood, do you? Srila

> Prabhupada was clear that there was only one interpretation of Vedic

> literature, and that is the interpretation which leads the reader to

> the knowledge of the Supreme Lord Krsna.

Of course. No, I didn't mean to question this at all. I was

suggesting authoritative interpretations of relatively minor importance.

 

 

> "Therefore we have published this Bhagavad-gita. It is the essence of

> all Vedic literature, Bhagavad-gita as it is. You have to learn

> Bhagavad-gita as it is. Don't interpret in your own way. There is no

> possibility. But people do it, and foolish persons, they accept it.

> No, there is no question of interpretation."

> (Lecture at Int. Student Society-Boston, May 3, 1969)

> Have I misunderstood your words? If so, would you care to clarify your

> position so that I may be corrected?

I was just trying to point out that whether we agree with someone

else's interpretation or not, it IS possible to interpret the BhAgavata,

etc., in slightly different ways. The importance of this fact is that even

among vaiSNavas, there are differences of opinion which guru/sAdhu/zAstra

can accommodate. I think this is extremely relevant nowadays. Sorry if I

confused anyone.

 

MDd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> I was just trying to point out that whether we agree with someone else's

> interpretation or not, it IS possible to interpret the BhAgavata, etc., in

> slightly different ways. The importance of this fact is that even among

> vaiSNavas, there are differences of opinion which guru/sAdhu/zAstra can

> accommodate. I think this is extremely relevant nowadays. Sorry if I

> confused anyone.

 

Unity in diversity, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> I was just trying to point out that whether we agree with someone else's

> interpretation or not, it IS possible to interpret the BhAgavata, etc., in

> slightly different ways. The importance of this fact is that even among

> vaiSNavas, there are differences of opinion which guru/sAdhu/zAstra can

> accommodate. I think this is extremely relevant nowadays. Sorry if I

> confused anyone.

 

Unity in diversity, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"nothing so transcendental as a calf sucking from its mother..."

 

do you have loose screws or what? that´s not the definition of

transcnedental that Prabhupada gave.

ys madanalasa dd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"nothing so transcendental as a calf sucking from its mother..."

 

do you have loose screws or what? that´s not the definition of

transcnedental that Prabhupada gave.

ys madanalasa dd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COM: Padmanabha (das) HKS (NJNK - D) wrote:

 

> [Text 1987937 from COM]

>

> "nothing so transcendental as a calf sucking from its mother..."

>

> do you have loose screws or what? that´s not the definition of

> transcnedental that Prabhupada gave.

> ys madanalasa dd

 

The following neither prove nor disprove either of the aboveK B

14“Therefore, my dear Lord, I pray that I may be so fortunate that in

this life or in another life, wherever I may take my birth, I may be

counted as one of Your devotees. Wherever I may be, I pray that I may be

engaged in Your devotional service. I do not even care what form of life

I get in the future, because I can see that even in the form of cows and

calves or cowherd boys, the devotees are so fortunate to be always

engaged in Your transcendental loving service and association. Therefore

I wish to be one of them instead of such an exalted person as I am now,

for I am full of ignorance. The gopis and cows of Vrindaban are so

fortunate that they have been able to supply their breast milk to You.

 

Conversation 10-14-77

 

Pradyumna: Er, er, “Then Lord Balaräma, thinking in this way,” iti

saïcintya, vayunena cakñuñä, “with the eye of knowledge”?

Prabhupada: Transcendental knowledge.

Pradyumna: “...with the eye of transcendental knowledge.” Sarvän

sa-vayasän (sahacarän) vatsän (goçävakän) api vaikuëöham (Sri Krsna eva)

äcañöa (apaçyat): “He saw all those calves as Sri Krsna only.” Vaikuntha

Sri Krsna eva apaçyat: “He saw that all those calves were Krsna.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COM: Padmanabha (das) HKS (NJNK - D) wrote:

 

> [Text 1987937 from COM]

>

> "nothing so transcendental as a calf sucking from its mother..."

>

> do you have loose screws or what? that´s not the definition of

> transcnedental that Prabhupada gave.

> ys madanalasa dd

 

The following neither prove nor disprove either of the aboveK B

14“Therefore, my dear Lord, I pray that I may be so fortunate that in

this life or in another life, wherever I may take my birth, I may be

counted as one of Your devotees. Wherever I may be, I pray that I may be

engaged in Your devotional service. I do not even care what form of life

I get in the future, because I can see that even in the form of cows and

calves or cowherd boys, the devotees are so fortunate to be always

engaged in Your transcendental loving service and association. Therefore

I wish to be one of them instead of such an exalted person as I am now,

for I am full of ignorance. The gopis and cows of Vrindaban are so

fortunate that they have been able to supply their breast milk to You.

 

Conversation 10-14-77

 

Pradyumna: Er, er, “Then Lord Balaräma, thinking in this way,” iti

saïcintya, vayunena cakñuñä, “with the eye of knowledge”?

Prabhupada: Transcendental knowledge.

Pradyumna: “...with the eye of transcendental knowledge.” Sarvän

sa-vayasän (sahacarän) vatsän (goçävakän) api vaikuëöham (Sri Krsna eva)

äcañöa (apaçyat): “He saw all those calves as Sri Krsna only.” Vaikuntha

Sri Krsna eva apaçyat: “He saw that all those calves were Krsna.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...