Reading Srila Prabhupada Straight

[Guest guest]

On 03 Oct 1999, Virender Dayal wrote:

 

> On 3 Oct 1999, Mundita Mastaka wrote:

> > > If Krsna tells you to do go-raksya through His

> > > bona-fide representative, and you carry out this order, it is PURE

> > > devotional service.

> >

> > Following this logic we may conclude that driving a car is also pure

bhakti even if the devotee driver is completely in maya speaking prajalpa all

the way.

>

> No, you don't follow the logic. He can't be completely in maya, if he's

following the order of the pure devotee. If he talks prajalpa along with his

driving, that is his own action which he has added to the order of the

spiritual master. So pick out the bhakti from the maya. However, it remains

a fact that if one executes the order without his own additions, he's acting

in pure devotional service.

 

Sorry, Prabhu, this is simply not true. Receiving the order of the spiritual

master (suddha-bhakta) gives the *seed* of bhakti, but it is up the performer

to execute that order purely. If one pollutes his bhakti with material

desires and sel-motivated actions, then it can be variously known as

karma-misra-bhakti, jnana-misra-bhakti. Such *mixed* devotion can be further

analyzed as bhakti-pradhana or karma-pradhana, depending on our consciousness.

 

 

Please don't think PURE DEVOTIONAL SERVICE is so cheap. According to NOD, pure

devotional service is "very rarely achieved."

[Guest guest]

On 3 Nov 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

 

 

>

> Sorry, Prabhu, this is simply not true. Receiving the order of the

spiritual

> master (suddha-bhakta) gives the *seed* of bhakti, but it is up the

performer

> to execute that order purely. If one pollutes his bhakti with material

> desires and sel-motivated actions, then it can be variously known as

> karma-misra-bhakti, jnana-misra-bhakti. Such *mixed* devotion can be further

> analyzed as bhakti-pradhana or karma-pradhana, depending on our

consciousness.

>

>

> Please don't think PURE DEVOTIONAL SERVICE is so cheap. According to NOD,

pure

> devotional service is "very rarely achieved."

 

 

 

I haven't been following this thread but I was just curious to have a look

because I always enjoy Srila Dasa's posts. His understanding and explanation

of devotional service as described here is very much appreciated. Thank you

Prabhu for taking the time to help the less mature devotees understand how

they are needing to rethink their superficial understanding of what it takes

to be a pure devotee, or to act in pure devotional service. Sincerely

Mahananda dasa

[Guest guest]

On 3 Nov 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

 

> On 03 Oct 1999, Virender Dayal wrote:

>

> spiritual master. So pick out the bhakti from the maya. However, it

remains

> a fact that if one executes the order without his own additions, he's acting

> in pure devotional service.

>

>

> Please don't think PURE DEVOTIONAL SERVICE is so cheap. According to NOD,

pure

> devotional service is "very rarely achieved."

 

Following the order of the spiritual master without ANY ADDITIONS is pure

devotional service; that's what I said and it is confirmed by sastra:

 

"When one is situated on the neophyte platform, one cannot understand

the devotional ingredients of a pure, unalloyed devotee. However, when

the novice engages in devotional service-especially in Deity

worship-and follows the order of a bona fide spiritual master, he

becomes a pure devotee. " (CC 15.106)

 

"The criterion is that a devotee must know what Kr.s.n.a wants him to

do. This can be achieved through the medium of the spiritual master who

is a bona fide representative of Kr.s.n.a. S'riila Ruupa Gosvaamii advises,

aadau gurv-aas'rayam. One who is serious in wanting to render pure devotional

service to the Lord must take shelter of the spiritual

master who comes in the disciplic succession from Kr.s.n.a. Evam^

paramparaa-praaptam imam^ raajars.ayo viduh.. Without accepting a bona fide

spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, one cannot find

out the real purpose of devotional service. Therefore one has to accept

the shelter of a bona fide spiritual master and agree to be directed by

him. THE FIRST BUSINESS OF A **PURE** DEVOTEE is to satisfy his spiritual

master, whose only business is to spread Kr.s.n.a consciousness . Yasya

prasaadaad bhagavat-prasaadah.: if one can satisfy the spiritual master,

Kr.s.n.a is automatically satisfied . This is the success of devotional

service. This is the meaning of the word aanukuulyena-that is, favorable

devotional service to the Lord . A PURE DEVOTEE has no plans other than

those for the Lord's service. He is not interested in attaining success

in mundane activities . He simply wants success in the progress of

devotional service. For a devotee, there cannot be worship of others or

demigod worship. A pure devotee does not engage himself in such

pseudo-devotional service. He is interested only in satisfying Kr.s.n.a.

If one lives only for the satisfaction of Kr.s.n.a, he does not have to

accept this order or that order . One's only business should be to

satisfy Kr.s.n.a. This process is completely manifest in the activities of the

Kr.s.n.a consciousness movement . It has been actually proved that the entire

world can accept devotional service without failure. One simply has to follow

the instructions of the representative of Kr.s.n.a."

 

There are many more references....

 

Sincerely,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

On 03 Nov 1999, Mahananda Dasa wrote:

>

> I haven't been following this thread but I was just curious to have a look

> because I always enjoy Srila Dasa's posts.

 

Thank you for your admitting your ignorance of the thread so the rest of your

comment is useless.

 

>His understanding and explanation

> of devotional service as described here is very much appreciated. Thank you

> Prabhu for taking the time to help the less mature devotees understand how

> they are needing to rethink their superficial understanding of what it takes

> to be a pure devotee, or to act in pure devotional service. Sincerely

> Mahananda dasa

 

Drawing speculative conclusions without understanding what is being said or

without understanding without Prabhupada said. Here you are claiming that

Srila Prabhupada is less mature than the mental speculator Srila.

 

Sincerely,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

On 3 Nov 1999, Virender Dayal wrote:

 

> There are many more references....

 

Letter to: Paramananda

--

Los Angeles

17 June, 1970

 

New Vrndavana

 

My Dear Paramananda,

Please accept my blessings. I beg to thank you for your kind letter

dated 7th June, 1970, and as I did not receive your letter since a long

time it is a great pleasure to have it now.

YOU HAVE RIGHTLY OBSERVED THAT I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO EXECUTE THE ORDER OF

MY SPIRITUAL MASTER. Whatever is being done it is not on

account of my intelligence or endeavor because I am simply an

instrument in the hands of my Spiritual Master. I do not know how far I

have got the capacity to carry His order, but I may say that I have a

sincere desire to do it. This is Parampara system. If a student tries

to satisfy his immediate Acarya or the Spiritual Master, that is the

only qualification for advancing in Krsna consciousness. This is

explained in the "Guruvastakam"-- yasya prasadah bhagavata prasadao.

So I am very much pleased that you are doing your job very nicely.

Everyone should try his best to do his part depending on Krsna and

Spiritual Master, then all success is there. I have heard about you how

nicely you are working in New Vrndavana. Your good wife, Satyabhama, is

also doing nice in teaching work. Similarly all our students are doing

their jobs very diligently, and that is my satisfaction.

Hope this will meet you in good health.

 

Your ever well-wisher,

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

-------------

 

August 3, 1973: Bhagavad-gita Lecture by Srila Prabhupada:

 

"So he's giving you. So you cannot say, "Oh, here is a peon . He's a poor

man . How he can give me one thousand dollars?" He's not giving; the

money is sent by somebody else. He's simply handing you. Therefore

Caitanya Mahaaprabhu says, aamaara aajn~aaya guru haya taara sarva-des'a,

taara ei des'a. He's asking everyone to become a spiritual master . So how

everyone can become a spiritual master? A spiritual master must have

sufficient knowledge, so many other qualifications . No. Even without

any qualifications, one can become a spiritual master . How? Now the

process is, Caitanya Mahaaprabhu says, aamaara aajn~aaya: "On My order ." That

is the crucial point . One does not become spiritual master by his own whims .

That is not spiritual master . He must be ordered by superior

authority. Then he's spiritual master . AAmaara aajn~aaya. Just like in our

case. Our superior authority, our spiritual master, he ordered me that "You

just try to preach this gospel, whatever you have learned from me, in

English." So we have tried it . That's all . It is not that I am very much

qualified . THE ONLY QUALIFICATION IS THAT I HAVE TRIED TO EXECUTE THE ORDER

OF SUPERIOR AUTHORITY. THAT'S ALL."

 

There are more references but I think you should get the drift now of why I

wrote that particular line.

 

Sincerely,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

>

> Drawing speculative conclusions without understanding what is being said or

> without understanding without Prabhupada said. Here you are claiming that

> Srila Prabhupada is less mature than the mental speculator Srila.

>

> Sincerely,

>

> Virender

 

Dear Virender,

 

You make some good points, but when you get all nasty like this to someone

your

content becomes eclipsed by your form.

 

Mahananda was just trying to be nice. Why not be swanlike and assume he meant

well instead of drawing out the worst possible conclusions about what he said?

I

happen to know that one of Mahananada's "faults" is that he is perhaps

overzealous in his defense of any little thing he feels is negative about Srila

Prabhupada. He would certainly never make the implication you have drawn.

[Guest guest]

On 3 Nov 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

> You make some good points, but when you get all nasty like this to someone

your

> content becomes eclipsed by your form.

 

I wasn't being nasty; I'm sorry if it came out like that. I was just trying

to defend Srila Prabhupada's statements.

 

> Mahananda was just trying to be nice. Why not be swanlike and assume he

meant

> well instead of drawing out the worst possible conclusions about what he

said?

> I

> happen to know that one of Mahananada's "faults" is that he is perhaps

> overzealous in his defense of any little thing he feels is negative about

Srila

> Prabhupada. He would certainly never make the implication you have drawn.

 

If he's just being overzealous and unreal when he says "rethinking the

superficial understanding of devotional service" then I beg for his

forgiveness. Please accept my humble obeisances.

 

your servant,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

On 3 Nov 1999, Srila Dasa wrote:

 

> Sorry, Prabhu, this is simply not true...

 

Please accept my humble obeisances and forgive any offenses.

Perhaps, you can point out exactly what you are disagreeing with when you say

"this is simply not true...".

 

your servant,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Sorry, Prabhu, this is simply not true. Receiving the order of the spiritual

> master (suddha-bhakta) gives the *seed* of bhakti, but it is up the performer

> to execute that order purely. If one pollutes his bhakti with material

> desires and sel-motivated actions, then it can be variously known as

> karma-misra-bhakti, jnana-misra-bhakti. Such *mixed* devotion can be further

> analyzed as bhakti-pradhana or karma-pradhana, depending on our

consciousness.

 

Actually, no matter what the consciousness of the gardener, the seed is

unaffected, to follow the analogy. When I plant a seed, it will do it's

thing

regardless of me. I can, by good gardening methods, enhance it's growth, or

by

neglect, slow it's growth, but the actual fruit of the seed is dependent on

it's

genetic code, not on me.

 

I have always liked this example of the guru passing along the seed. It really

illustrates the importance of the sampradaya over the individual guru.

Although

certainly we can see that Srila Prabupada was a proficient seedsman, who was

able

to voluminously reproduce and spread the seed, and we may not be able to

emulate

that, but if we just try to follow his instructions, the seed can fructify

and

grow. And the course of it's growth is already contained in the seed itself.

[Guest guest]

It is hard to advance in devotional service if we are not humble. A little

knowledge, and we are going to entrench our selves in our narrow conceptions

and defend our position from that fortified mental station.We think we shall

defeat others by personal attack and hostility."Pride, arrogance,conceit,

anger, harshness and ignorance--these qulities belong to those of demoniac

nature....Absorbed in the conceit of pride and false prestige, the

demoniac......he is my enemy,and I have killed him,and my other enemies

shall also be killed..." "...always impudent,deluded by ....false

prestige..."

 

The exchanges of Vaisnavas in their association is respectful and sweet. When

there is the presence of a devotee who is always aiming personal attacks at

others the whole atmosphere is poluted and is most unfortunate. Mahananda

dasa

[Guest guest]

On 4 Nov 1999, Mahananda Dasa wrote:

 

> It is hard to advance in devotional service if we are not humble...

 

Yes, so stop attacking Prabhupada. You can't tell the difference between

preaching and and an attack. You are the one who attacked by saying: "rethink

the superficial understanding" when the statements made were directly from

Srila Prabhupada.

 

> The exchanges of Vaisnavas in their association is respectful and sweet...

 

Yes, ever heard Srila Prabhupada smash the scientists. They are VERY sweet

and swanlike if you see that Srila Prabhupada was trying to defend Krsna's

statements AND not doing it for his own sake.

 

> others the whole atmosphere is poluted and is most unfortunate.

 

yes, stop blaspheming Prabhupada in the name of defending him.

 

NOTE: I wouldn't have replied since I have stopped reading texts in this

conference for some weeks, but I WAS THE RECEIVER OF YOUR GARBAGE in my email,

so I had to reply or absorb your offense of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Thanks,

 

Sincerely,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

On 4 Nov 1999, Mahananda Dasa wrote:

 

> defeat others by personal attack and hostility."Pride, arrogance,conceit,

anger, harshness and ignorance--these qulities belong to those of demoniac...

 

By the way, your quote above is also an ATTACK on me and not preaching. You

are speculating again and randomly chose some quote to suit YOUR OWN needs

(blasphemy of Vedic literature). Even if you think I am angry, proud, and

harsh, these qualities when used in the service of Krsna lose their material

qualities.

 

Anyway, I don't try to defend attacks on myself. I don't mind being labeled a

demon as long as I can continue to act in my devotional service to Krsna

eternally.

 

Sincerely,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

On 4 Nov 1999, Virender Dayal wrote:

 

...

 

For those that still see the messages posted by me as personal attacks, I

offer my respectful obeisances:

 

vanca-kalpa-taru bhyas ca

krpa sindhu bhya eva ca

patitanam pavanebhyo

vaisnave bhyo namo namah

 

your servant,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

Dear Virender Dayal

 

You wrote:

 

> I wasn't being nasty; I'm sorry if it came out like that. I was just

> trying to defend Srila Prabhupada's statements.

 

I urge you to follow Madhavasa's advise. Defending Srila Prabhupada was not

a reason for speaking like that.

 

Ys

[Guest guest]

Dear Varender, please accept my humble obeisanes. I dont think we were talking

about the same quotes, or i was mixing up posts purhaps. If you thought that I

would dare to criticize our beloved spiritual master then i am truly horrified

that I gave you that impression. There must be some simple explaination.

Anyone who knows me knows I love Srila Prabhupada greatly and have never

spoken badly about him, so there must be some mistake. I have reread all of

the posts again and i cant understand what you meant by saying I was

inadvertantly saying something badly about our founder acarya. I would

literally die first. So if someone wants to write me( besides Virendra

purhaps, who seems to dislike me already...lol) and explain to me if i have

actually accidently implied something improper about our spiritual

preceptor.But I am certain that Krsna knows my heart and might protect me from

making suh a mistake. I will reread again a couple of times and maybe I will

get a grip on what you are talking about.

 

Why did you assume I was talking about you , by the way, with the quotes I

gave....affectionately Mahananda dasa

[Guest guest]

On 4 Nov 1999, Mahananda Dasa wrote:

 

> literally die first. So if someone wants to write me( besides Virendra

> purhaps, who seems to dislike me already...lol)

 

I don't dislike you... see the explanation below for my reaction.

 

> Why did you assume I was talking about you , by the way, with the quotes I

> gave....affectionately Mahananda dasa

 

Here's what I wrote about 1 month ago:

 

"No, you don't follow the logic. He can't be completely in maya, if he's

following the order of the pure devotee. If he talks prajalpa along with his

driving, that is his own action which he has added to

the order of the spiritual master. So pick out the bhakti from the maya.

However, it remains a fact that if one executes the order

without his own additions, he's acting in pure devotional service. "

 

Srila disagreed with this (for some reason) and wrote some comment. Then you

commented on Srila's message supporting him FULLY. But you went one step

further than Srila and actually accused me and others that lesser mature

devotees should rethink their superficial ideas about pure devotional service

and pure devotees. However, the statement about pure devotional service (the

last line above) is DIRECTLY based on Prabhupada's purports and the example

set by the pure devotee Srila Prabhupada himself by acting solely to fulfill

the desire of his spiritual master. Thus, by blindly agreeing with Srila, you

disagreed with Srila Prabhupada's teachings and example.

 

That's what I understood and reacted accordingly.

 

your servant,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

Virender, your offensively criticizing others for offending Srila Prabhupada

because they agreed with someone who disagreed with you(whom you consider only

saying exacly as Srila Prabhupada taught, so therefore by disagreeing with you

is disagreeing with Srila Prabhupada) , is itself the only real transgression

against acceptable Vaisnava behavior on the present thread. Each time you do

that...every time you recklessly offend others(even the least of the devotees,

but who are sincerely trying to surrender their lives to Krsna)you minimize

your own position. But, I am sorry that this advise to you will not be humbly

acceptable to you and we will again get another volley of what you see as

acceptable behavior to others in the Vaisnava community..Mahananda dasa

[Guest guest]

On 05 Nov 1999, Mahananda Dasa wrote:

 

> Virender, your offensively criticizing others for offending Srila

Prabhupada...

 

As I said, I never criticized; I only did my devotional service of speaking

out vociferously against blasphemy of pure devotees which is recommended in

various places in the sastra.

 

> because they agreed with someone who disagreed with you(whom you consider

only

> saying exacly as Srila Prabhupada taught, so therefore by disagreeing with

you

> is disagreeing with Srila Prabhupada) , is itself the only real

transgression...

 

I don't "consider" it to be what Prabhupada taught; it's right there in black

and white and a FACT:

 

"The bona fide representative of God is as good as God Himself. Or, in other

words, the loving representative of the Lord is more kind and more easy to

approach. A sinful soul cannot approach the Lord directly, but such a sinful

man can very easily approach a pure devotee of the Lord. AND IF ONE AGREES TO

PUT HIMSELF UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF SUCH A DEVOTEE OF THE LORD, HE CAN ALSO

UNDERSTAND THE SCIENCE OF GOD AND CAN ALSO BECOME LIKE THE

TRANSCENDENTAL *PURE DEVOTEE* OF THE LORD and thus get his liberation back to

Godhead, back home for eternal happiness." (Bhag. 2.7.46)

 

Just another of many references. You have not shown any reference for your

speculation that following the order of the spiritual master is superficial

and not enough to become a pure devotee.

 

your servant,

 

Virender

http://www.krishnasoft.com

[Guest guest]

>

>

> Srila disagreed with this (for some reason) and wrote some comment. Then you

> commented on Srila's message supporting him FULLY. But you went one step

> further than Srila and actually accused me and others that lesser mature

> devotees should rethink their superficial ideas about pure devotional service

> and pure devotees. However, the statement about pure devotional service (the

> last line above) is DIRECTLY based on Prabhupada's purports and the example

> set by the pure devotee Srila Prabhupada himself by acting solely to fulfill

> the desire of his spiritual master. Thus, by blindly agreeing with Srila,

you

> disagreed with Srila Prabhupada's teachings and example.

 

Now that is a much nicer presentation. If you present it that way, then

Mahananda has a chance to understand what you are saying, and decide if he had

just misunderstood the discussion to that point, or perhaps had not presented

his

own point clearly enough. There is a chance to work to a mutual understanding,

or

at least to an amiable state of agreeing to disagree.

 

By simply jumping all over him, he will just harden his position.

 

It is one thing to have a vigourous ksatriya attitude and try to stop abuse of

children and neglect of cows whatever, but philosophical discussion is just

that

- philosophical discussion, and a more brahminical approach may be more

productive.

 

In this particular discussion, I happen to agree with your philosophy, as my

post

about the nature of seeds was intended to convey.

 

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

"WWW: Mahananda (Dasa) ACBSP (Alachua FL - USA)" wrote:

 

> [..every time you recklessly offend others

 

Oh please Mahananda, give it a rest. Your incessant labeling of the least

little

thing that annoys you as an offense is reminiscent of the story of the boy who

cried wolf.

 

Virender may have been rude, he may have been inconsiderate and intolerant,

but

let's try practicing a little tolerance ourselves as to what constitutes an

offense.

 

If I were to walk up to you while you are eating and toss a piece of raw meat

on

your plate, that starts to be an offense. ( The aforementioned activity is

mentioned for purposes of relativity only, and should not be construed as a

threat, neither explicitly nor implied.)

[Guest guest]

yes, thank you. I agree. my gracious apologies to Virender. I t was a minor

thing. We tend to get a little carried away on line over trivials. My

affectionate obeisances to all of you, Mahananda dasa I think it will

be better for everyone if I dont post any more, since I am only disturbing

others. ...please accept my humble obeisances

[Guest guest]

On 4 Nov 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

> Actually, no matter what the consciousness of the gardener, the seed is

unaffected, to follow the analogy. When I plant a seed, it will do it's

thing regardless of me. I can, by good gardening methods, enhance it's

growth, or by neglect, slow it's growth, but the actual fruit of the seed is

dependent on it's genetic code, not on me.

 

Madhava Ghosh, I think you may be mixing up your analogies and thus becoming

somewhat confused or unclear in your conclusions. The *seed* we need to refer

to in this case is likened to the human being, not the *gardening analogy.

 

The pertinent analogy is: the guru must be *potent* and the disciple must

be *fertile*. BOTH are required for proer conception.

 

It is not just the "seed" -- both GRACE and EFFORT are required.

 

 

Furthermore, after getting the seed from the bona fide guru and even the

disciple was initially fertile, the seed can be ruined. Extending the analogy:

the pregnant mother can consume alcohol or take cocaine and thus the "baby"

will come out with permanent brain damage (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, Coke Baby,

etc.). This is similar to the effect of serious offenses. We see this

practically: once exuberant devotees under Prabhupada have become livid

vilifiers today. We have to be so careful.

 

 

WE CANNOT TAKE PURE DEVOTIONAL SERVICE SO CHEAPLY.

 

(my original point in this discussion.)

 

Cautiously,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

Virender has written:

 

> Yes, so stop attacking Prabhupada. You can't tell the difference between

preaching and and an attack.

 

> Thank you for your admitting your ignorance of the thread so the rest of

your comment is useless.

 

> Drawing speculative conclusions without understanding what is being said or

without understanding without Prabhupada said. Here you are claiming that

Srila Prabhupada is less mature than the mental speculator Srila.

 

> NOTE: I wouldn't have replied since I have stopped reading texts in this

conference for some weeks, but I WAS THE RECEIVER OF YOUR GARBAGE in my email,

so I had to reply or absorb your offense of Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Your philosophy is defeated by your manner. Then you have the gumption to

tell everyone else what PURE DEVOTION is about?

 

 

"Your actions speak so loud we can't hear what you're saying."

 

 

Frankly,

 

Srila dasa

[Guest guest]

Virender has written:......

 

Pardon me, but there is a lot of presumption here that Virender knows what

pure devotional service and the other respective members of this discussion

don't know ANYTHING:

 

 

- we are "attacking Prabhupada"

- "useless"

- "without understanding what Prabhupada said"

- "speculative conclusions"

- "mental speculator"

- "YOUR GARBAGE"

 

I suppose that these are simply the "preaching ecstasies" of PURE devotion?

But the ignorant and faithless like us cannot recognize this, I guess.

 

 

> For those that still see the messages posted by me as personal attacks, I

offer my respectful obeisances:

 

vanca-kalpa-taru bhyas ca

krpa sindhu bhya eva ca...

 

I am sorry, I don't accept your apologies as *genuine*.

 

I do think your comments ("attacks") were SINCERE, however:

 

SINCERE: characterized by firm belief in the validity of your opinions; "both

sides were deeply in earnest, even passionate"; "an entirely sincere and cruel

tyrant". (Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University)

 

 

Frankly,

 

Srila dasa

 

A *tyrant* is obsessed by himself and his own opinions and proceeds to inflict

his influence upon everyone else in a haughty and demeaning manner.

[Guest guest]

8. Preaching without proper conduct falls within the category of karma,

mundane activity. Without criticizing the nature of others, one should

correct one's self --- this is my personal instruction.

 

(The Upadesavali of Sri Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Prabhupada)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

In my previous posting, while I meant to simply point out the improper manner

of Virender's comments, I inevitably fell into a similar trap, that of

criticizing the critizer -- railing the nature of the *sinner* instead of

merely indicating the *sin.*

 

I am genuinely sorry for that. I beg the forgiveness of one and all.

 

I respectfully submit that each one of us can learn our respective lessons

from Srila Sarasvati Thakura's instruction if we are at all serious about

developing PURE DEVOTION.

 

Humbly,

 

Srila dasa