Sentimentalism vs Sadhu's knife

[Guest guest]

> Actualy I feel it should be

> made clear to rely on no one, except our own conviction, when it comes to

> choosing who is to be our guru, and we should be painfully aware of what

> an imitation guru is like, we now have a lot of examples.

 

I think that I made already this point before, that is that an

outsider can't understand what for I might be indebted and

thankful to my guru who is now fallen from his position.

Having unconcern individuals judging the relationship that

I have had with him to be my "grave mistake" is a simply a

nonsense. It undermines completely not only my convictions,

but me as an individual capable of conducting and evaluating

my own life situations.

 

>

> What criteria do we use to judge a persons spiritual advancement, how can

> we tell how advanced someone is? What is 'substantial' advancement?

 

You don't use *any* criteria when it comes to judging somebody

that is not your concern.

 

You use the certain criteria to evaluate the spiritual advancement

of somebody that you, for example, are contemplating to accept

as your guru.

 

Other people and other people's guru -- you live without passing

your judgment on.

 

 

> But what is a bonafide guru? Surely he

> has to be able to give you Krsna. And if he does not have Krsna, how can

> he give? I dont have all the answers to this.

 

 

So then you don't have to judge on the first place. Simple.

 

 

Philosophically, one can discuss these things, certainly.

So far we have been presented here by so clear evidence

from our acaryas that illustrated how a guru may fall down.

That even a Vaisnava guru who in the time of someone's

initiation was conversant in the Absolute Truth may, due

to certain reasons, deviate later on from the path.

Have you seen these statements?

 

But I can't say WHY some of us here will simply insist to

ignore these evidence, and will go on hammering the "stark

facts" onto the individuals about their individual relationship

with their respective guru. This I call - mayavada.

 

 

 

> Maybe he was a Kanistha, or

> Madhyama guru, and maybe he will come back for his disciples, I dont know.

 

Maybe the unconcerned persons should stop speculating about

something that is not in their domain.

 

 

> But right now he is fallen, so what can he do, and what should his

> disciples do?

 

Leave it to them. The genuine concern is always welcome, certainly,

but there is a golf of difference in between that and hammering

the conclusions on their heads how their grave mistake was to

enter into the relationship on the first place, how they have

never been connected to the Guruparampara, never initiated into

the process, and so on. Don't patronize anybody.

 

 

>

> Yes you can take a guru that might fall down, but it just means that you

> will have to wait a few births before you can go home. That is why it is

> reccomended to take an uttama guru.

 

A few births only is a wonderful result.

 

Still, I doubt that you got some evidence that will support the

above idea. For example, the initiating guru is one, while there

may be unlimited number of instructing gurus. If my initiating guru

happens to be, in this life time, not an uttama guru, there

is no prohibition that I can accept your initiating guru,

who is an uttama guru, as my instructing guru in this life time.

 

 

> Of course there is no loss. It might

> be that we are not ready for full surrender in this life, and our desires

> betray that, so we might take a lesser advanced guru, and be with him/her

> for a few lives.

 

In any case, on which base then somebody hare takes for himself

the right to claim that somebody's guru was not guru at all?

That he was an imitation. Or a cheat. Or pretender.

 

 

 

>

> Of course ignorance also plays a part. Some people will take lesser gurus,

> begin their spiritual life, and after some more births finaly reach

> perfection, if they dont make aparadha. But we canot rely on ignorance as

> an alibi. I dont think Yamaraj will accept that.

 

I also don't think that Yamaraja will accept that. But out of other

reasons. Having on mind the story of Ajamila's life, Yamaraja is

not in charge anymore of those who chanted the Holy Name of Krsna.

 

Let's assume that some of us who still haven't reach the perfection

have at least chanted a few round of Hare Krsna Maha-mantra on

our japas.

 

 

 

> I think sometimes that

> the problem is that we think ISKCON will take us home. ISKCON is not a

> stretcher that we can rely on like that. ISKCON is a tool, an assembly of

> people who are determined to do whatever it takes individualy to go home.

> We have to take responsibility for our own lives.

 

Good point. But we also see the practice in ISCKON to consider

that individual's responsibility over their own lives is in

the domain of public to scrutinize, evaluate, pass judgments,

decide, cut into, and so on.

 

 

>

> Dead right. No inexpereinced knife wielders please. Pure devotees do that

> best. If you want to avoid bad knife wielders, dont surrender to lesser

> souls. But we will, ignorance wont save us from that.

 

So is it anything wrong in my attempt to avoid some bad knife

wielders here? I mean, I am apparently quite far away from any

desire to even think of surrendering to these "lesser souls",

as you call them. No, I am not humble to let them go on with

it, my goodness.

 

 

>

> Prabhu, I was also cheated and I am also cheating still now in subtle

> ways. I am not personaly branding anyone. I dont wish to attack Mahanidhi

> prabhu. Rather I wish to urge him to be cautious lest he do himself some

> harm.

 

I think I can try on my own to escape the bed knife wielders.

Thanks for the help.

 

 

>

> Your text is very sensitive, and you refrain from heated words, and I

> appreciate the way you are presenting your points. I feel that Mahanidhi

> prabhu could learn from your approach, but he tends to go for personal

> attacks, so it appears to me. I think that is dangerous. But then maybe I

> am just misreading.

 

A little patronizing is of no harm.

 

The irony appears to me to be that the person who is being chewed

here on is neither Samba nor somebody else, but - Mahanidhi

(and his bogus no-guru, of course).

 

 

It is indicative that you are able to perceive the personal

attacks from me, but are unable to see how I also could be

in the situation to perceive some other people's ways

of acting towards me as a personal attack on me.

 

-----

 

 

I got more important things to do in my life than wasting the

time in discussing and arguing about myself with anybody here,

go on and on defending myself and my life decisions and my

relationship with my "no-guru"... Actually, all this is disgusting.

Better go somewhere else where people either don't know whom I was

initiated by, or they do not bother about.

I don't need all this. Bye.

 

 

 

..