Guest guest Posted June 29, 1999 Report Share Posted June 29, 1999 On 28 Jun 1999, Srila Dasa wrote: > Srila's Prabhupada's books fall under the category of *SASTRA*. We still > REQUIRE *GURU* (spiritual master) and *SADHU*. Srila Prabhupada (guru and sadhu) is IN his books in the form of his purports. One single source package for all fallen souls without any qualification needed except literacy. Or they can hear it read to them. This is clearly the whole meaning of Srila Prabhupada's mission in writing his books. He never said once he leaves we have to go to anyone else to understand them. That is the "philosophy" of people who want to control and dole out tickets to the spiritual world through religious institutions and big gun gurus and priests. The same thing happened in Lord Jesus' time and many other times throughout history. Its hogwash. *Sadhu* includes all varieties > of devotee association (subordinates, equals and seniors), but it especially > means "high-class, advanced association" -- inasmuch as *guru* similarly > refers to all varieties of *guru*, but particularly to the 1st-class (uttama) > Vaisnava. Your advocacy of minimizing the GURU is already well-known and > documented on this conference. Now I wish to suggest your understanding is > equally defective in terms of *SADHU*. Thems are fightin' words, fella. Show me in sastra how Srila Prabhupada's books cannot be our sadhu. You may have given up on our guru maharaja but don't try to convince anyone else to follow your wayward path. > There must always be an appropriate balance between GURU, SASTRA AND SADHU. > This is Gaudiya-VAISNAVA PHILOSOPHY. Otherwise, you run the risk of becoming > MAYAVADA with an undue emphasis simply on reading books (viz, "studying > Vedanta"). Srila Prabhupada's books are not "Vedanta"; they are of pure devotional service and anyone reading them will reach the perfection of love of God. > > You will never understand them unless you READ them. > > "We read the Bible day and night. You see black while I see white." > - William Blake The Bible does not have Srila Prabhupada's purports. Jd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 1999 Report Share Posted June 30, 1999 > > Frankly, > > Srila dasa > > PS: Let's hear some more quotes, "Satan." You denigrate someone as a redneck for using the term hogwash and then refer to him as "Satan"? Hard to not consider you as simply baiting him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 1999 Report Share Posted July 1, 1999 On 30 Jun 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote: > > PS: Let's hear some more quotes, "Satan." > > You denigrate someone as a redneck for using the term hogwash and then refer to him as "Satan"? Hard to not consider you as simply baiting him. Funny that you pick up on peripheral interpretations and ignore the essential issues at stake. But yes, since you mention it, there was some "aikido" footwork that turned the innuendo back into his court. I am simply replying in kind, however. Janesvara Prabhu made the original denigrating remark ("hogwas!") and I simply called him on it, making an equally heavy counter-challenge. "Satan" (in quotes) means in context to my argument, not literally. In the spirit of genuine discussion, Srila dasa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 1999 Report Share Posted July 1, 1999 > "Satan" (in quotes) means in context to my argument, not literally. > > In the spirit of genuine discussion, > > Srila dasa > Phew, that's a relief! Janesvara is already scary enough without having "The Prince of Darkness" on his resume. .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.