Knowing without thinking?

[Guest guest]

> I think, (or I made the observation!) that too often devotees or aspiring

> devotees, seem to close down theyr natural ability to "think",

 

Mr. Bhattacarya: We just took a hired taxi to this place and that place. And

he would go for preaching. I never talked to him during the preaching, but

once when I was coming back from the preaching, I said, “You said this thing

about this. But I tell you it is not this. It is this." I crossed him in

something or argued. And he was furious. Whenever we argued and I said, “No,

I think this is this," then he was shouting. He was very furious. He said,

“You are always saying, “I think, I think, I think.' What is the importance

of what you think? Everything is what you think. But it doesn't matter. It

matters what sastra says. You must follow." I said, “I must do what I think,

what I feel—that is important." He said, “No, you should forget this. You

should forget your desire. You should change your habit. Better you depend

on sastras. You follow what sastra wants you to do, and do it. I am not

telling you what I think, but I am repeating what the sastra says."

(Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita, Chapter 4)

 

> > Also, please consider that the duty of a spiritual master is to reform

> > the character of his disciples. How can he do that without pointing out

> > errors?

>

> Well, you started to critizize all critizizing, I have no problems with it

> when it is utilized properly for the benefit of the devotees and theyr

> society, and acording to guru, sadhu and sastra and common sense If I may

> alowed to add this also.

 

Yes, this is what I was attempting. I was pointing out a social fact. Most

devotees aren't pure, but they are being purified. Still, as long as we

aren't pure, the propensity to criticize will be there--like it or not.

Only a pure devotee is free from this propensity.

 

> > The "party line" is following conclusions based on Guru-Sadhu-Shastra.

>

> That means we can judge them or should I say "critizize" them on that

> basis also. Or?

 

"Judging" is exactly what a madhyama adhikari does:

 

isvare tad-adhinesu

balisesu dvisatsu ca

prema-maitri-krpopeksa

yah karoti sa madhyamah

 

"The madhyama-adhikari is a devotee who worships the Supreme Personality of

Godhead as the highest object of love, makes friends with the Lord's

devotees, is merciful to the ignorant and avoids those who are envious by

nature." (SB 11.2.46, quoted NOI 5)

 

This is very general, but even within vaishnava society, there is

discrimination:

 

"Devotional service executed by a person who is envious, proud, violent and

angry, and who is a separatist, is considered to be in the mode of

darkness." (SB 3.29.8)

 

"The worship of Deities in the temple by a separatist, with a motive for

material enjoyment, fame and opulence, is devotion in the mode of passion.

(SB 3.29.9)

 

"When a devotee worships the Supreme Personality of Godhead and offers the

results of his activities in order to free himself from the inebrieties of

fruitive activities, his devotion is in the mode of goodness. (SB 3.29.10)

 

"The manifestation of unadulterated devotional service is exhibited when

one’s mind is at once attracted to hearing the transcendental name and

qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is residing in

everyone’s heart. Just as the water of the Ganges flows naturally down

towards the ocean, such devotional ecstasy, uninterrupted by any material

condition, flows towards the Supreme Lord." (3.29.11-12)

 

This set of verses above is a criteria by which devotees (including the one

passing judgment) can be judged. And yes, we have to judge:

 

"In order to intelligently apply the sixfold loving reciprocations mentioned

in the previous verse, one must select proper persons with careful

discrimination. Srila Rupa Gosvami therefore advises that we should meet

with the Vaisnavas in an appropriate way, according to their particular

status. In this verse he tells us how to deal with three types of

devotees—the kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari. "

(NOI 5, Purport)

 

The point I'm making here is that judgment (discrimination) is absolutely

necessary.

 

For argument's sake, let us assume that most devotees (at least 51%) in

ISKCON are free from the propensity to criticize others. That would make

them uttama-adhikaris (if we accept Srila Rupa Goswami's verdict in NOI 5 --

ONLY the uttama-adhikari has this qualification of nindadi-sunya hridam).

Now, is this the fact, that more than one out of every two devotees are

uttama-adhikaris? Are you willing to base a social system on this

assumption?

 

Of course not. Such thinking is, of course, utopian. Rather, we base our

social system on the assumption that most devotees are not uttama-adhikaris.

(And there seems to be abundant evidence for this.) Our society is made up

mostly of devotees who ARE NOT uttama-adhikaris, so it is reasonable to

expect that the propensity to criticize is there--it may be manifest or

unmanifest, but it is surely there.

 

One aspect of varnashrama which deals specifically with this unfortunate

fact of the propensity to criticize is the respect given to the sannyasa

order. Lord Caitanya took sannyasa because, although He was certainly

preaching, others were criticizing Him. He took sannyasa because people

were, by custom, inclined to offer respect to sannyasis, and by offering

obeisances to the Lord, offenders would become free of their offenses. One

of the purposes of varnashrama-dharma, therefore, is to curb the tendency to

commit offenses (caused by criticism, envy, negligence, etc.)

 

> > If we don't follow, then we are offending either guru, previous acharyas

> > or scripture.

>

> Any support from Guru-Sadhu-Sastra for your statemnt?

 

Offenses, or aparadhas, are there whenever we disregard any of these.

 

The third offense against the holy name is guru-avajna, disobeying the order

of the spiritual master.

 

Not following shastra has disastrous results:

 

yah sastra-vidhim utrjya vartate kama-karatah

na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham no param gatim

 

'He who discards scriptural injuntions and acts according to his own whims

attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination.' (Bg

16.23)"

 

Lord Caitanya took exception when Vallabhacarya said he wrote a commentary

on the Bhagavatam that was better than Sridhara Swami's. The Lord remarked:

 

svami na mane yei jana vesyara bhitare tare kariye ganana

 

"One who does not accept the svami [husband] as an authority I consider a

prostitute."

 

> > How can offenders be pure?

> I dont know, you supose to know?

 

By avoiding offenses.

 

> > We have to be honest with ourselves and ask, "Am I a pure devotee?" If

> > the answer is "no", then we should be aware of our shortcomings.

>

> What is your definition of a pure devotee?

 

"The manifestation of unadulterated devotional service is exhibited when

one’s mind is at once attracted to hearing the transcendental name and

qualities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is residing in

everyone’s heart. Just as the water of the Ganges flows naturally down

towards the ocean, such devotional ecstasy, uninterrupted by any material

condition, flows towards the Supreme Lord." (3.29.11-12)

 

There are other symptoms of a pure devotee, but this is good for starters.

 

> > We should at least understand that somewhere we are not cent percent

> > surrendered.

>

> What does cent percent surrendered means to you?

 

In the Preface to the Caitanya Caritamrita, Srila Prabhupada lists six

symptoms of surrender: (1) accept things favourable to the discharge of

devotional service; (2) reject things unfavourable; (3) believe firmly in

the Lord's protection; (4) feel exclusively dependent on the mercy of the

Lord; (5) have no interest separate from the interest of the Lord; and (6)

always feel oneself meek and humble.

 

> > If we aren't pure we aren't pure.

> And..?

 

We have to surrender, and that means accepting a means of purification

suitable to our level of advancement. Not only must we engage in sravanam

kirtanam, but we should also follow as far as possible the prescriptions of

varnashram-dharma (accepting things favourable to the discharge of

devotional service). Although Varnashrama dharma is not specifically

devotional service, it helps the sadhaka because the spiritual practices of

a devotee who is not yet fully purified can be disturbed by material

circumstances. (One of the specific characteristics of pure devotional

service are that it cannot be disturbed by any material circumstance.)

 

> Such as...? (You supose to know, I think)

 

Like premature acharyas, for example.

 

ys KKdas