Guest guest Posted October 12, 2004 Report Share Posted October 12, 2004 Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada! (Offense against chanting the holy name (understood in any of these four ways in different places): To consider the names of the demigods, such as Lord Siva or Lord Brahma, to be equal to or independent of, the name of Lord Vishnu. OR One who sees differences between any of Lord Siva's qualities and names and those of Sri Vishnu is an antagonist to harinama OR to see the holy names of the Lord in terms of worldly distinction.. Any nomenclature which is meant for the Supreme Lord is as holy as the others because they are all meant for the Lord OR to think Krishna is separate or different from His name.) Generally in ISKCON we "recite" the first understanding on a regular basis. The second interpretation of that offense is given by Sanatana Gosvami in Brhad Bhagavatamrta The third is given by Srila Prabhupada in second canto Bhagavatam as follows: "The second offense is to see the holy names of the Lord in terms of worldly distinction. The Lord is the proprietor of all the universes, and therefore He may be known in different places by different names, but that does not in any way qualify the fullness of the Lord. Any nomenclature which is meant for the Supreme Lord is as holy as the others because they are all meant for the Lord. Such holy names are as powerful as the Lord, and there is no bar for anyone in any part of the creation to chant and glorify the Lord by the particular name of the Lord as it is locally understood. They are all auspicious, and one should not distinguish such names of the Lord as material commodities." SB 2.1.11purport The last interpretation is given by Bhaktivinoda Thakura. There will be an upcoming article in BTG, as part of the series I was requested to write on the ten offenses to the name, which explains these various aspects in more detail. And, yes, I know the statement about the thousand names of Vishnu equal to three names of Rama equal to one name of Krishna. The question is "equal in what way"? If one distinguishes between names of God, that is an offense. Not different potency; the difference is in rasa. And, yes, Bhaktivinoda writes of primary and secondary names... **But** whether a name is primary or secondary, a name of Vishnu or Krishna, depends to a large extent upon the mentality of the person saying the name. In fact, even names commonly associated with the demigods are also Krishna's name if said in that mood (e.g. Agni in Isopanisad) Gaura Keshava Prabhu said that perhaps raganuga bhaktas are not interested in Vishnu's name, but we find the gopis referring to Krishna's different incarnations. Their perception is that all of these are Krishna. Jayadeva Goswami sings of the ten incarnations, and his mind is fixed always on Keshava, Krishna (Keshava can also be a name for Vishnu, of course.) How wonderful is Krishna that He has all these incarnations!! The gopis also call Krishna "natha" which literally means "Lord." Are they chanting secondary names according to Bhaktivinoda's definition? I don't think so. :-) Their understanding of "natha" is quite different from the "Lord" said by the Jews, Christians, and Muslims, is it not? Mother Yasoda chants the names of Vishnu to "protect" Krishna! Such see the mood of a ragatmika bhakta. It is not so simple, is it? :-) In Brhadbhagavtamrita, Sanatana Goswami tells us that when Gopa Kumar went to Vaikuntha, some of the residents there objected to calling Vishnu "Gopal" and regarded Krishna as an incarnation of Vishnu. So, whether one indicated Vishnu, Krishna, or some vague idea of God to these various names is, to a large extent, in the mood of the chanter. Even names of Krishna such as Yasoda-nanadana or Radha-natha would be understood by a worshipper of Vishnu or Narayana to be referring to an incarnation of Narayana, as evidenced in the Brhadbhagavatamrta. Atri muni called on the name of the Lord without any clear idea and Brahma, Siva, and Vishnu all came to him. When a devotee chants "Rama" in the mahamantra, does he or she think of Parasurama, Ramachandra, Balarama, or Radha-raman? Such depends on the mood of the devotee, does it not? Will we object to the mahamantra because it can refer to Ramacandra, Sitapati? So, while the Vishnu Sahasranama is not a major part of Gaudiya Vaisnavas' practice, to discriminate among the names of the Lord is an offense to the name. If we hear or chant those names, and we are a staunch devotee of Krishna, then we will hear those names as Krishna's names. As to what devotees should do if they have "extra time," there are many places where Prabhupada said that we should be chanting constantly and that if we have time we should chant Hare Krishna. He also wrote: "According to the regulative principles, there are nine departmental activities, as described above, and one should specifically engage himself in the type of devotional service for which he has a natural aptitude. For example, one person may have a particular interest in hearing, another may have a particular interest in chanting, and another may have a particular interest in serving in the temple. So these, or any of the other six different types of devotional service (remembering, serving, praying, engaging in some particular service, being in a friendly relationship or offering everything in one's possession), should be executed in full earnestness. In this way, everyone should act according to his particular taste." NOD chap 16 So, beyond the basic sadhanna practices which apply to everyone, such as minimum sixteen rounds, mangal arotik, studying Bhagavata, etc. one "should" engage in the nine processes "according to his particular taste." We are very much a movement that recognizes and rejoices in individuality. I hope this is helpful. Your servant, Urmila devi dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 2004 Report Share Posted October 12, 2004 Dear Maharaj and prabhus,pamho agtsp. On oct 9th,2004,at 3:16 pm,panchratna das (gkg)(bbt manager,mumbai-in) This same message i received from bhadra govinda prabhu then i send to goura kesava prabhu.Bhadra govinda prabhu already sent email to all,still if any one have any quarry he will explain. ys,panchratna das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2004 Report Share Posted October 13, 2004 Isvara Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP. I totally agree with you on this. Namanam akari bahudha.... I remember when Srila Prabhupada was in (Teheran?) he preached to them they can chant any name of God Allah etc,. but he himself chanted Hare Krishna. Ofcourse there is nothing wrong in chanting Allah. Vishnu Sahasranama is really wonderful and Baladeva Vidya Bhusana has written a commentary also on that. Lord Caitanya was very happy when He saw devotees chanting Vishnu Sahasranama. However we must remember our core business is chanting Hare Krishna. We are Hare Krishnas and so we must spread Hare Krishna. That is we must chant everyday 16 malas of Hare Krishna. One chants Vishnusahasranama daily or not is OK for a member of ISKCON. But if one does not chant Hare Krishna it is not OK for an ISKCONian. Sorry if I confused and looked like offeensive towards other Holy Names of God other than Krishna. I was just talking about priority and focus for us.. People overlooked my statement "I love Vishnu Sahasranama but I love Hare Krishna" more. And talking about Kirtan, Srila Prabhupada said Bhagavadgita class/Srimad Bhagavatam class is also Kirtan. Hare Krishna, Your humble servant, Bhadra Govinda Dasa. - "Isvara (das) GGS (Touchstone Media - IN)" <Isvara.GGS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> "Bhadra Govinda Dasa" <raganuga (AT) cyberway (DOT) com.sg>; "Gregory Jay" <gregjay (AT) softhome (DOT) net>; "Panchratna (das) GKG (BBT Manager, Mumbai - IN)" <Panchratna.GKG (AT) pamho (DOT) net> Cc: "India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum)" <India.Open (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Bhanu Swami (Madras - IN)" <Bhanu.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Tattvavit (das) ACBSP (BBT)" <Tattvavit.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Nrsimha Kavaca (das) IDS" <Nrsimha.Kavaca.IDS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> Monday, October 11, 2004 9:11 PM Visnu Sahasranama > Visnu-sahastra has been commented upon by most of our great Vaisnava > acaryas > (I think it was first chanted by Pitamaha Bhismadeva on the battlefield of > Kuruksetra, while gazing at Lord Krishna, on his deathbed), so I don't > know > how a devotee will try to dissuade others from chanting such. We've been > having the cassette of the Visnu-sahastranam sung by Laksmi Subramanian > for > long time. It is always soothing hearing it early in the morning. I think > devotees need to really mature, about the glories of the Lord's holy > names, > otherwise one stands the chance of committing offenses on the pretense of > chanting the Hare Krishna maha mantra. It is mentioned in the scriptures > that each and every names of Lord Visnu or Krishna contains all the > potencies of Godhead, and can awards one all perfections. We should humbly > respect those who shows attraction to chanting various Lord's names > especially Visnu-sahastranam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2004 Report Share Posted October 13, 2004 > > So, beyond the basic sadhanna practices which apply to everyone, such as > > minimum sixteen rounds, mangal arotik, studying Bhagavata, etc. one > > "should" > > engage in the nine processes "according to his particular taste." We are > > very much a movement that recognizes and rejoices in individuality. > > > > I hope this is helpful. > > > > Your servant, Urmila devi dasi > > Thank you mataji for the wonderful write up. All glories to all the > unlimited Names of the Supreme Lord. Hari Nama Cintamani is also an > excellent resource to undestand about the Holy Name of Supreme Lord, and > about offences to the Holy Name. There I remember it is said, one cannot > advance if one makes offences even to other living entities what to speak > of Vaisnavas and Holy Name. > > For me the bench mark is Srila Prabhupada. What his predecessors say or > his successors say, I will accept only if it is in agreement with Srila > Prabhupada. > > If Rupa Goswami IN BRS prescribes "Ganesha Worship" and Srila Prabhupad > forbids it for me, I will follow Srila Prabhupada. This kind of thinking is not really proper, that we only accept the teachings of the previous acaryas, only if they are in agreement with Srila Prabhupada's teachings. This goes more than sectarian thinking. Srila Prabhupada would often say that his only qualification is that he is only repeating whatever he has heard from his guru. Ours is not a personality worship. Of course Srila Prabhupada presented to us perfectly the teachings of the previous acaryas according to our qualification, and some of the teachings, he was silent pending the qualification of the individual disciples. Srila Prabhupada said in the beginning days of ISKCON, when the Deity worship was just being started, that he if he was to tell the devotees everything then, that they would faint. Srila Prabhupada said we should chant sixteen rounds of the Hare Krishna maha-mantra, but Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said unless one is chanting 64 rounds of mala per day, one is considered fallen. Does that mean you will not accept that instructions of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, because you only want to follow Srila Prabhupada. The fact is all these instructions of our acaryas require maturity in Krishna consciousness. One must be open to a bigger picture and broader view of Krishna consciousness in order to really make a tangile advancement. ys, Isvara dasa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2004 Report Share Posted October 13, 2004 > > For me the bench mark is Srila Prabhupada. What his predecessors say or > his successors say, I will accept only if it is in agreement with Srila > Prabhupada. > Dear Bhadra Govinda Prabhu, Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada! Yes, we ISKCON devotees all have Prabhupada as our ultimate authority. However, one cannot automatically assume that something is in disagreement with Prabhupada based on one particular letter, etc. One must study Prabhupada's works completely over a period of time and in association with devotees who have realization. And, what to do when there's apparent disagreement between one's guru and others is not always "black and white." Again, I refer you to the paper the SAC presented to the GBC that deals with this subject. > If Rupa Goswami IN BRS prescribes "Ganesha Worship" and Srila Prabhupad > forbids it for me, I will follow Srila Prabhupada. I hope I'm correct in assuming that you don't think Rupa Gosvami to be "wrong," just that one should follow one's own guru's instructions. Indeed, Rupa Gosvami himelf states as much in the same book--that all must accept a guru, and the details will then differ according to the guru. > > Another example below regarding Narayana Kavaca in Srimad Bhagavatam. > > After finishing this chanting, one should think himself qualitatively one > with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is full in six opulences and > is > worthy to be meditated upon. Then one should chant the following > protective > prayer to Lord Narayana, the Narayana-kavaca.---- SB 6.8.11 > > Regarding the Narayana Kavaca mantra, the Hare Krsna mantra is > everything.---- Srila Prabhupada in letter to HH Jayapataka Swami > Maharaja. Well, if you regularly read Bhagavatam, which is Prabhupada's instructions, then in effect you *are* chanting all the mantras and prayers contained therein. > > Although there are bonafide mantras / chants / vratas etc,. in SB and > other > authorised sastras for us Hare Krishna is everything as per our founder > acarya Srila Prabhupada. So I do not personally go out and chant other > mantras (even bonafide) on regular basis, but only occasionally, on > specific festival days etc,. of different incarnations. And I donot go > out to preach other chants other than Hare Krishna. Of course, Hare Krishna is the mahamantra, and there are other prayers that Prabhupada himself told us to chant and to preach to others to chant..For example, there's this interesting quote in regards to the story of Gajendra: "It is imperative, therefore, that all devotees in Krsna consciousness practice chanting some mantra. Certainly one should chant the Hare Krsna mantra, which is the maha-mantra, or great mantra, and also one should practice chanting cintamani-prakara-sadmasu or the Nrsimha strotra (ito nrsimhah parato nrsimho yato yato yami tato nrsimhah). Every devotee should practice in order to chant some mantra perfectly so that even though he may be imperfect in spiritual consciousness in this life, in his next life he will not forget Krsna consciousness, even if he becomes an animal." Bhag 8.3.1purport And here's another interesting quote from Srila Prabhupada about a mantra in the Bhagavatam: "This mantra is very important. Anyone engaged in Deity worship should chant this mantra, as quoted above, beginning with om namo bhagavate maha-purusaya." Bhag 6.19.7 purport (om namo bhagavate maha-purusaya mahanubhavaya mahavibhuti-pataye saha maha-vibhutibhir balim upaharamiti; anenahar-ahar mantrena visnor avahanarghya-padyopasparsana-snana-vasa-upavita-vibhusana-gandha-puspa-dhupa-di popaharady-upacaran susama-hitopaharet) SB 6.19.7 > Being a neophyte I do not have any taste either for Hare Krisha or Vishnu > Sahasranama. But because Srila Prabhupada said, Hare Krishna is every > thing I prefer to chant Hare Krishna more than other mantras. I prefer to > stay neophyte and chant Hare Krishna more, even though I have good > understanding of Holy Names and offences by mercy of Vaisnvas, guru and > Krishna. Are you implying that devotees who also like to sing the songs of Bhaktivinoda, etc. are puffed-up and think themselves higher than neophytes? Should they cease all such bhajanas and simply chant Hare Krishna? :-) I'm sure you do not mean that, but your statements come across like that. Your preaching to that group is a very enlivening story. Preaching to "Hindus" has its own flavor and necessities. Your servant, Urmila devi dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2004 Report Share Posted October 13, 2004 PAMHO AGTSP On Oct 13, 2004, at 5:23 PM, Bhadra Govinda Dasa wrote: Once again Bhadra Govinda das shows his ignorance of Srila Prabhupada's books and teachings. > If Rupa Goswami IN BRS prescribes "Ganesha Worship" and Srila > Prabhupad forbids it for me, I will follow Srila Prabhupada. "One should begin the worship of the demigod Gan•apati, who drives away all impediments in the execution of devotional service. In the Brahma-sam•hit• it is stated that Gan•apati worships the lotus feet of Lord Nr•sim•hadeva and in that way has become auspicious for the devotees in clearing out all impediments. Therefore, all devotees should worship Gan•apati." Srila Prabhupada's Nectar of Devotion Chapter 8. So Bhadra Govinda das picks and chooses what parts of Srila Prabhupada's instructions that he wants to follow. Whereas he should actually learn to appreciate ALL of Srila Prabhupada's instructions. This is one of the biggest problems with neophytes. Anybody with a computer and a Vedabase can pull a quote from Srila Prabhupada to justify just about anything., but without any real understanding. However the harder thing to do is to actually understand ALL of his teachings in context and in a way that also does not blaspheme the rest of the Guruparampara that Srila Prabhupada has Himself given us and whom He Himself accepts as absolute authorities. > Another example below regarding Narayana Kavaca in Srimad Bhagavatam. > > After finishing this chanting, one should think himself qualitatively > one > with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is full in six opulences > and is > worthy to be meditated upon. Then one should chant the following > protective > prayer to Lord Narayana, the Narayana-kavaca.---- SB 6.8.11 > > Regarding the Narayana Kavaca mantra, the Hare Krsna mantra is > everything.---- Srila Prabhupada in letter to HH Jayapataka Swami > Maharaja. So once again we see two instructions by Srila Prabhupada which seem contrary. However why should we think that they are contrary? One instruction is from Srila Prabhupada's translation of Srimad Bhagavatam which we know he intended for everyone to read and follow and the other is from a personal letter to one disciple and one time and one place and one circumstance. We do not know the context of the personal instruction that Srila Prabhupada gave to Jayapataka Swami in this regard, however we do know that what he wrote in his books he meant for all persons, at all times and all circumstances. > Although there are bonafide mantras / chants / vratas etc,. in SB and > other > authorised sastras for us Hare Krishna is everything as per our > founder > acarya Srila Prabhupada. This statement is made by someone who ignores the general instructions of Srila Prabhupada in his books and insists on emphasizing ONLY His personal instructions to individual devotees without even understanding the context of those instructions. > I prefer to stay neophyte and chant Hare Krishna more, even though I > have good understanding of Holy Names and offences by mercy of > Vaisnvas, guru and Krishna. This is obviously sarcasm. If one were really a neophyte then how could one claim to have a "good understanding of Holy Names and offenses". As I pointed out in a previous email this devotees does not actually have a good understanding of the Holy Name or offenses. Otherwise why are so many senior devotees trying to tell him this? > Talking about the group that I mentioned earlier here which we were > trying to preach Srila Prabhupada's teachings, they were more or less > a so called Hindu group. They used to meet every week end and chant > Vishnu Sahasranama, Lalita Sahasranama, Ganesha stotram, Sai Bhajan or > anything that came across as so called Hindduism although they called > themselves "Vishnu Sahasranama" group of people. But you did not explain that. Of course there is a difference between Visnu Sahasranama chanting and Lalita Saharanama chanting. Obviously chanting the names of Devas cannot be accepted on the same level as chanting the names of the Supreme Lord. However this still does not justify your comments on Visnu's names. As for Ganesha you should understand that Gaudiya's Vaisnavism is NOT against, nor did Srila Prabhupada write in his books against the worship of Ganesha. If you don't accept this fine, however you are simply in denial. I am not saying that it is equal or more important than the worship of Lord Krsna but it is a fact that it is there and was written about by Srila Prabhupada. He did not change the places in his books where he advocates Ganesha worship despite not encouraging certain devotees to do it in some personal instructions. The neophyte cannot understand both these things at the same time. However more mature devotees can accept ALL of Srila Prabhupada's instructions IN CONTEXT. > We also last year a devotee chanting 16 malas to some south Indian > sectarian Vaisnavas as we were too broad minded and allowed him to > attend their program, thinking after all all they were Vaisnvas. Some > thing that happened with Narayana Maharaj, happened that they told him > that prapatti is more easy and different than devotional service > etc,.(although both bhakti and prapatti are same) they preaached him > differently and finally he was supposed to take diksa with ISKCON > guru, he left chanting Hare Krishna, and became a sectarian chanting > other Vishnu Mantras but not Hare Krishna, and even took some diksa in > one of their maths. So you are showing your own sectarian bias here. Again I want to say to you that since Srila Prabhupada and all the Gaudiya Acharyas have accepted 4 bonafide Vaisnava Sampradayas, that you should also. So what if someone took initiation from Sriman Narayana Jeer Swamiji (I assume this is who you are talking about). He is a bonafide Acharya of the Ramanuja Sampradaya so where is the problem. This person who took initiation from him obviously was convinced that he was bonafide. I personally know this Swamiji and also consider him bonafide. So I am quite happy that he is initiating people. You also should be happy that someone wants to take initiation from a bonafide guru from a bonafide sampradaya. The fact that you see this as a mistake is your own sectarian bias which is not shared by the previous Gaudiya Vaisnava Acharyas or Srila Prabhupada. As we can see from (Their) His endorsement of the 4 bonafide Vaisnava sampradayas. By the way, there are similarities between Bhakti as understood by Gaudiya Vaisnavas and Prapatti as understood by Sri (Ramanuja) Vaisnavas, but you are wrong that they are exactly the same. > So who is sectarian? Both you and Sriman Narayana Jeer are both sectarian. You belong to different sects. Admit it. But the difference is that He sees you and ISKCON as a Vaisnava group which he can respect but you however do not respect Him and his sampradaya as bonafide even though all the Guru's in your Parampara do. > If I can chant Hare Krishna and get all the benefit of chanting all > Vishnu Mantras, what is the harm if some one just chanted Hare > Krishna with out offending other Holy Names with proper understanding? There is no harm in you just chanting Hare Krsna. However there is also no harm in that devotee becoming a Sri Vaisnava. Why should there be? That is a bonafide sampradaya even according to Srila Prabhupada. So why should you think otherwise? Gaura Keshava das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 > So, beyond the basic sadhanna practices which apply to everyone, such as > minimum sixteen rounds, mangal arotik, studying Bhagavata, etc. one > "should" > engage in the nine processes "according to his particular taste." We are > very much a movement that recognizes and rejoices in individuality. > > I hope this is helpful. > > Your servant, Urmila devi dasi Thank you mataji for the wonderful write up. All glories to all the unlimited Names of the Supreme Lord. Hari Nama Cintamani is also an excellent resource to undestand about the Holy Name of Supreme Lord, and about offences to the Holy Name. There I remember it is said, one cannot advance if one makes offences even to other living entities what to speak of Vaisnavas and Holy Name. For me the bench mark is Srila Prabhupada. What his predecessors say or his successors say, I will accept only if it is in agreement with Srila Prabhupada. If Rupa Goswami IN BRS prescribes "Ganesha Worship" and Srila Prabhupad forbids it for me, I will follow Srila Prabhupada. Another example below regarding Narayana Kavaca in Srimad Bhagavatam. After finishing this chanting, one should think himself qualitatively one with the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is full in six opulences and is worthy to be meditated upon. Then one should chant the following protective prayer to Lord Narayana, the Narayana-kavaca.---- SB 6.8.11 Regarding the Narayana Kavaca mantra, the Hare Krsna mantra is everything.---- Srila Prabhupada in letter to HH Jayapataka Swami Maharaja. Although there are bonafide mantras / chants / vratas etc,. in SB and other authorised sastras for us Hare Krishna is everything as per our founder acarya Srila Prabhupada. So I do not personally go out and chant other mantras (even bonafide) on regular basis, but only occasionally, on specific festival days etc,. of different incarnations. And I donot go out to preach other chants other than Hare Krishna. Being a neophyte I do not have any taste either for Hare Krisha or Vishnu Sahasranama. But because Srila Prabhupada said, Hare Krishna is every thing I prefer to chant Hare Krishna more than other mantras. I prefer to stay neophyte and chant Hare Krishna more, even though I have good understanding of Holy Names and offences by mercy of Vaisnvas, guru and Krishna. Talking about the group that I mentioned earlier here which we were trying to preach Srila Prabhupada's teachings, they were more or less a so called Hindu group. They used to meet every week end and chant Vishnu Sahasranama, Lalita Sahasranama, Ganesha stotram, Sai Bhajan or anything that came across as so called Hindduism although they called themselves "Vishnu Sahasranama" group of people. We had a strategy to give them the real thing, that is Srila Prabhupada's teachings and bring them out of their offensive chanting, and our strategy has worked, and most of them over the last 6 months have been chanting Hare Krishna Maha Mantra. They have purchased Vedabase, and Prabhuada's books and slowly cominng to Srila Prabhupada, by reading them regularly. To make them come out of the level of equating Vishnu and Lalita and ganeesh etc,. we had to really work hard, and we have somm successs. Two families have given up non veg, onion, garlic, coffee, tea etc,.and two of them have come up to 16 malas of Hare Krishna Maha Mantra. Neither I have offended them, nor have they offended me in our weekly meetings. We are all happy here chanting Hare Krishna and trying to spread Srila Prabhupada's glories in some small way. The earlier so called Visnu Sahasranama Group is now real Vishnu Sahasranama Group. Ofcourse some have gone away as they do not want to give up Lalita Sahasranama but over all we could pull out and help some of them. We also last year a devotee chanting 16 malas to some south Indian sectarian Vaisnavas as we were too broad minded and allowed him to attend their program, thinking after all all they were Vaisnvas. Some thing that happened with Narayana Maharaj, happened that they told him that prapatti is more easy and different than devotional service etc,.(although both bhakti and prapatti are same) they preaached him differently and finally he was supposed to take diksa with ISKCON guru, he left chanting Hare Krishna, and became a sectarian chanting other Vishnu Mantras but not Hare Krishna, and even took some diksa in one of their maths. So who is sectarian? They who stopped our devotee give up Hare Krishna and chant other Vishnu mantras or us who help them not only chant other Vishnu Mantras but also Hare Krishna? Especially where in Kali Yuga we have time? If I can chant Hare Krishna and get all the benefit of chanting all Vishnu Mantras, what is the harm if some one just chanted Hare Krishna with out offending other Holy Names with proper understanding? Hope this meets you in the best of health and Krishna Consciousness. Hare Krishna. Your humble servant, Bhadra Govinda Dasa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Bhadra Govinda wrote: > > If Rupa Goswami IN BRS prescribes "Ganesha Worship" and Srila Prabhupad > > forbids it for me, I will follow Srila Prabhupada. Ishvara wrote: > This kind of thinking is not really proper, that we only accept the > teachings of the previous acaryas, only if they are in agreement with > Srila Prabhupada's teachings. If there are apparent contradictions in the teachings between Srila Prabhupada and the other acharyas in our sampradaya, and there is no way to intellectually resolve these contradictions (so that they are shown to not actually be contradictions) then it behooves us a members of ISKCON to favor Srila Prabhupada's version over any other. That's what it means when we say Srila Prabhupada is the pre-eminent founder acharya of ISKCON. It is the duty of any ISKCON member to honor his allegiance to Srila Prabhupada by propagating his and only his version. That does not mean we show disrespect to other acharyas or other Gaudiya maths or that we don't accept them. We respect them as Vaishnavas and accept that they have the right to hold different opinions, but we always favor Srila Prabhupada's version over their's. So in that sense it not improper to think that 'we accept the teachings of the previous acaryas, only if they are in agreement with Srila Prabhupada's teachings. >This goes more than sectarian thinking. > Srila Prabhupada would often say that his only qualification is that he is > only repeating whatever he has heard from his guru. So Srila Prabhupada is setting the example for us. >Ours is not a personality worship. Actually it is. We worship the personality of Srila Prabhupada as the pre-eminent founder acharya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. >Of course Srila Prabhupada presented to us perfectly > the teachings of the previous acaryas according to our qualification, and > some of the teachings, he was silent pending the qualification of the > individual disciples. That is a complete speculation. There is no basis what so ever for the assumption that there were certain aspects of the teachings of the previous acharyas Prabhupada was silent about pending the qualification of individual disciples. In fact, he said that all the knowledge we need in order to develop love for Krishna was given in the first canto of Srimad Bhagavatam. >Srila Prabhupada said in the beginning days of > ISKCON, when the Deity worship was just being started, that he if he was > to tell the devotees everything then, that they would faint. That does not mean that there were certain aspects of the teachings of the previous acharyas that he kept silent about pending the qualifications of individual disciples. He may have kept certain details of deity-worship from us because he didn't see them as important for the preaching mission, and because he didn't want to overwhelm us. >Srila > Prabhupada said we should chant sixteen rounds of the Hare Krishna > maha-mantra, but Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said unless one is chanting 64 > rounds of mala per day, one is considered fallen. Does that mean you will > not accept that instructions of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, because you only > want to follow Srila Prabhupada. It means that we accept Srila Prabhupada's instructions on the number of rounds we chant over those of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja. >The fact is all these instructions of our > acaryas require maturity in Krishna consciousness. Obviously we cannot follow all the instructions of all the acharyas so we limit ourselves to follow those of our founder acharya. >One must be open to a > bigger picture and broader view of Krishna consciousness in order to > really make a tangile advancement. One must be absolutely faithful to Srila Prabhupada and his institution to make tangible advancement in devotional service. In fact, Srila Prabhupada went so far as to say, that if anyone thinks they can go outside of these walls (of ISKCON) to make spiritual advancement they are greatly deluded. Of course if someone has never been inside the walls of ISKCON and is seeking shelter of some other Vaishnava guru, that's an entirely different matter, but if someone is in ISKCON to begin with and then goes somewhere else to make spiritual advancement thinking something is lacking in Srila Prabhupada's teachings, then he is greatly deluded. Your servant Jahnudvip das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Pamho. AGTSP. Thank you Mother Urmila and Gaura Keshava Prabhu for your instructive texts. I am getting sometimes desperate seing that we want to minimize other devotional practices. I remmember in 98 when I was serving Jayapataka Maharaja in South Indian Safari. He said at Kanchipuram that we should also get inspiration from Sri Vaishnavas seing that we need some healthy respect towards Krishna as presented in the Vaikuntha mood also. Many devotees jump to some sentimentalism and cheap understanding. Some will take complete shelter of Holy names, some will engage in many of different activities performing the service of Krishna with sravanam, kirtanam, vadanam, archanam, pada-sevanam, dasyam, sakhyam, atmanivedanam. We can archive with any of this processes perfection. Still we as Gaudiya Vaishnavas follow the instruction of Lord Caitanya to chant Hare Krishna Maha Mantra, and act according to his "bolo krishna, bhaja krishna, kore krishna upadesha..." instruction. But we should never be proud of our devotional activities minimizing others who are trying to purely serve Krishna also with the 9 processes. I dont think we can make a general rule for devotees. We have our basic devotional program morning program, chanting 16 rounds, reading SP books. Then in rest of time however a devotee uses the time to remmember the Krishna it will be also individual differences. I see what counts is that how much was one able to remmember Krishna and not forget him as Gaura Keshava Pr. stated very correctly. How many hours one was not engaged in mind with the 3 moods of material nature and hankering after material desires? We have also 1008 names of Gaura written by Sri Srimad Kavi Karnapurna Thakur and 1008 names of Radha, Gopal, Krishna, Radha Krishna in the scriptures. We can chant Bhagavatam slokas,etc. Lord Caitanya gave one devotee the name Bhagavat Acarya since he was chanting the Bhagavatam so purely. Nectar of Instruction, Verse 5: The Krsna consciousness movement prescribes sixteen rounds daily because people in the Western countries cannot concentrate for long periods while chanting on beads. Therefore the minimum number of rounds is prescribed. However, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura used to say that unless one chants at least sixty-four rounds of japa (one hundred thousand names), he is considered fallen (patita). According to his calculation, practically every one of us is fallen, but because we are trying to serve the Supreme Lord with all seriousness and without duplicity, we can expect the mercy of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who is famous as patita-pavana, the deliverer of the fallen. I know when I had problems with ghosts my Gurumaharaja also adviced me to chant Narasimha mantras. Then without distraction I could chant Hare Krishna more concentrated. YHS DKD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Dear Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS), (Oh dear, do we have another disciple of Jayapataka Swami who needs to study all of Srila Prabhupada's instructions???) On Oct 13, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN) wrote: > If there are apparent contradictions in the teachings between Srila > Prabhupada and the other acharyas in our sampradaya, and there is no > way to > intellectually resolve these contradictions (so that they are shown to > not > actually be contradictions) then it behooves us a members of ISKCON to > favor > Srila Prabhupada's version over any other. But that IS the point, there are certainly ALWAYS ways to resolve these things. I have explained the ways. However you refuse to accept those ways. Lets be very, very clear about this. If as you say, there is absolutely no way of reconciling contradictory views between one Acharya and another in a sampradaya then one must be an APA-SAMPRADAYA view. When devotees say that Srila Prabhupada has said something FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT from the previous Gaudiya Vaisnava Acharya's or the Gaudiya Vaisnava sastras or siddhanta what they are really saying is that they are rejecting their Sampradaya, and without the Sampradaya there is no way to accept Srila Prabhupada either. This attitude is actually very, very offensive not only to Srila Prabhupada but also to the entire Gaudiya Parampara. I have come across this attitude in a few fanatic ISKCON devotees before. However they do not realize the consequences of their zealotism. When one only accepts one's own guru and rejects the rest of the guruparampara (of which one's guru is a part) then one in fact actually rejects his guru also. Therefore one must be able to understand ALL of the instructions of the Parampara in context. Some persons would like Srila Prabhupada to stand alone in a sort of spiritual vacuum as the only one with the absolute truth. This is not the method of receiving the absolute truth. It is only received in the descending process. Srila Prabhupada told us that he was "simply repeating the words of his guru maharaja" and following in the footsteps of the previous Acharyas. He is the one who gave us in the beginning of Bhagavad Gita As It Is the list of the guruparampara that He Himself accepts. For us to reject these statements or this line means that we also reject Srila Prabhupada. But neophytes are was stated too wrapped up in the personality cult of their own guru to realize that everybody's guru (even Srila Prabhupada) is someone else's disciple, therefore if that guru has his own different philosophy it cannot be in line with the guruparampara and is therefore known as APA-SAMPRADAYA. If you cannot reconcile the perceived differences between guru in the parampara then your conclusion is that those who differ from the parampara are APA-SAMPRADAYA. Please don't come to this conclusion. Instead read ALL the instructions and understand how they can be reconciled in context. You have no choice but to reconcile them otherwise you must declare one right and another wrong. That is small-mindedness and neophyte mentality. > That's what it means when we say > Srila Prabhupada is the pre-eminent founder acharya of ISKCON. Yes, I agree with this. And ISKCON is a part of the Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. Therefore ISKCON philosophy must also be the philosophy not only of Srila Prabhupada but also of the whole Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. You cannot say that they are unreconcilably different. > It is the duty of any ISKCON member to honor his allegiance to Srila > Prabhupada by > propagating his and only his version. NO, it is the duty of ISKCON members to reconcile Srila Prabhupada's statements with the statements of all the other previous Acharyas in the Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. They are non different. If you think they are different then that is offensive and you are not correct. Therefore think again. Understand these things in context. And if you can't then you need to ask your guru to help you understand. > That does not mean we show disrespect > to other acharyas or other Gaudiya maths or that we don't accept them. If you reject the ideas of the previous Acharyas of course you disrespect not only them but also Srila Prabhupada who had absolute faith in them. As for other contemporary organizations they have to be judged by the same standard that you judge anyone. Are they in line with the standards of the sampradaya? > We respect them as Vaishnavas and accept that they have the right to > hold > different opinions, but we always favor Srila Prabhupada's version over > their's. What we are talking about here is probably just details. Not differences on siddhanta. If the siddhanta is different the it must be another sampradaya. > So in that sense it not improper to think that 'we accept the > teachings of the previous acaryas, only if they are in agreement with > Srila > Prabhupada's teachings. It certainly is offensive and Urmila and I and Isvara are telling you this. We are senior devotees to you and if you do not accept this idea please ask your guru. I think that you will find that he also agrees with us that one must accept Srila Prabhupada's teachings are the same (in essence if not in adjustable detail) with those of the previous Acharyas. > So Srila Prabhupada is setting the example for us. Yes, Srila Prabhupada's example to us also is based on his presentation to us of himself as a transparent via medium for the teachings of the previous Acharyas. If you do not accept Srila Prabhupada is a transparent via medium for the previous Acharyas teachings then that is offensive. >> Ours is not a personality worship. > > Actually it is. We worship the personality of Srila Prabhupada as the > pre-eminent founder acharya of the International Society for Krishna > Consciousness. Yes, Srila Prabhupada is certainly preeminent in ISKCON as the founder Acharya of ISKCON. However this does not mean that he preached something different from the rest of the Gaudiya Sampradaya or the previous Acharyas. All of them are presenting the same thing. You, only have to understand his teachings in this way. >> Of course Srila Prabhupada presented to us perfectly >> the teachings of the previous acaryas according to our qualification, >> and >> some of the teachings, he was silent pending the qualification of the >> individual disciples. > > That is a complete speculation. There is no basis what so ever for the > assumption that there were certain aspects of the teachings of the > previous > acharyas Prabhupada was silent about pending the qualification of > individual > disciples. Actually you are wrong again, there are many times and places in Srila Prabhupada's books where he mentions that one should read a particular book when one is more advanced. Or where he indicated that we should study some other Gaudiya sastras to get more information. And even during Srila Prabhupada's presence with us he introduced more complex ideas and parts to our sadhana as we became more able to accept those things. > In fact, he said that all the knowledge we need in order to > develop love for Krishna was given in the first canto of Srimad > Bhagavatam. Again, you have taken ONE SINGLE EARLY QUOTE completely out of context. This cannot be accepted as an absolute instruction otherwise other instructions for us to "read all my books" would have to be rejected. Please stop just quoting single specific instructions that in context were very meaningful completely out of context. Yes, in one sense everything is in the first canto, but also at the same time we have to read other books of Srila Prabhupada but the first canto, like NOD, Bhagavad Gita, Caitanya Caritamrta, etc, etc, etc. Don't be so fanatic that you think that you can quote just one quote and that all other quotes mean nothing in comparison to it. That's just silly and immature. >> Srila Prabhupada said in the beginning days of >> ISKCON, when the Deity worship was just being started, that he if he >> was >> to tell the devotees everything then, that they would faint. > > That does not mean that there were certain aspects of the teachings of > the > previous acharyas that he kept silent about pending the qualifications > of > individual disciples. Actually that's exactly what is does mean. This is a very good example of how Srila Prabhupada first of all instructed us on simple deity worship and then later wanted us to follow Arcana Paddhati. If you doubt this see http://geocities.com/deityworship. > He may have kept certain details of deity-worship from > us because he didn't see them as important for the preaching mission, > and > because he didn't want to overwhelm us. Not that they were not important but that they were not important in the beginning. And yes, he did not indicate that we need to follow everything in Hari Bhakti Vilasa, only what is in Arcana Paddhati. You are correct that he did not want to overwhelm us in the beginning. And we all saw how he trained us slowly and added things as the movement grew not all at once. This is clear. >> Srila Prabhupada said we should chant sixteen rounds of the Hare >> Krishna >> maha-mantra, but Srila Bhaktisiddhanta said unless one is chanting 64 >> rounds of mala per day, one is considered fallen. Does that mean you >> will >> not accept that instructions of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, because you >> only >> want to follow Srila Prabhupada. > > It means that we accept Srila Prabhupada's instructions on the number > of > rounds we chant over those of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja. Both are correct. Neither is wrong. Lord Caitanya's standard was 64 rounds, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's standard was 64 rounds, Srila Prabhupada's standard in the beginning was 64 rounds, then he adjusted it to 16 rounds MINIMUM. 16 is not the number, it is the MINIMUM. We cannot say that there is a difference. We have to reconcile these seemingly different instructions. One should always remember Lord Visnu (Krsna) and never forget him, all rules and regulations are subservient to these two. This is a quote from Rupa Goswami's Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu and also Srila Prabhupada's Nectar of Devotion. So many times Srila Prabhupada said like this that the real goal is not the number of rounds that you chant (although he was very strict that he didn't want us to do less than 16 minimum) but he wanted us to be Krsna conscious 24 hours a day. >> The fact is all these instructions of our >> acaryas require maturity in Krishna consciousness. > > Obviously we cannot follow all the instructions of all the acharyas so > we > limit ourselves to follow those of our founder acharya. This is not obvious. You can certainly follow all the instructions of all the previous Acharyas. That's why they gave those instructions. For people to follow them. That's why they wrote those books. For people to read and follow them. Now, admittedly there may be some detailed instructions of the previous Acharyas and also of Srila Prabhupada that are optional or that are meant only for particular time, place and circumstances or particular disciples. >> One must be open to a >> bigger picture and broader view of Krishna consciousness in order to >> really make a tangile advancement. > > One must be absolutely faithful to Srila Prabhupada and his > institution to > make tangible advancement in devotional service. One must be absolutely faithful to ALL Srila Prabhupada's instructions and not just the one's one thinks he would like to follow. And one must at the same time be absolutely faithful to the whole parampara. > In fact, Srila Prabhupada > went so far as to say, that if anyone thinks they can go outside of > these > walls (of ISKCON) to make spiritual advancement they are greatly > deluded. This is also quoted out of context. Do you even know the context of this quote. This quote has to do with those who left ISKCON to follow Siddhasvarupa Goswami in Hawaii. It does not apply to those following other bonafide Vaisnava sampradayas or groups. If you think that they you are deluded and do not understand the context of this quote. Once again since you were not there and we were and since your knowledge is simply based on pulling random quotes out of context which anyone with a computer and vedabase can do, you should probably take advantage of some older godbrother's instructions on this matter. sincerely, Gaura Keshava das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Gaura Keshava wrote: > (Oh dear, do we have another disciple of Jayapataka Swami who needs to > study all of Srila Prabhupada's instructions???) Actually, I spent half my life studying all of Srila Prabhupada's instructions. > On Oct 13, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN) wrote: > > > If there are apparent contradictions in the teachings between Srila > > Prabhupada and the other acharyas in our sampradaya, and there is no > > way to > > intellectually resolve these contradictions (so that they are shown to > > not > > actually be contradictions) then it behooves us a members of ISKCON to > > favor > > Srila Prabhupada's version over any other. > > But that IS the point, there are certainly ALWAYS ways to resolve these > things. I have explained the ways. However you refuse to accept those > ways. Not so. There is for instance the example of the jiva issue. There was no way to resolve it to everyone's satisfaction except to accept that two conclusions were stressed differently by different acharyas. So Prabhupada stressed one the most, so we in ISKCON accept that. > Lets be very, very clear about this. If as you say, there is absolutely > no way of reconciling contradictory views between one Acharya and > another in a sampradaya then one must be an APA-SAMPRADAYA view. Not necessarily. See above. > When devotees say that Srila Prabhupada has said something > FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT from the previous Gaudiya Vaisnava Acharya's or > the Gaudiya Vaisnava sastras or siddhanta what they are really saying > is that they are rejecting their Sampradaya, and without the Sampradaya > there is no way to accept Srila Prabhupada either. This attitude is > actually very, very offensive not only to Srila Prabhupada but also to > the entire Gaudiya Parampara. First of all, I don't accept that Srila Prabhupada said anything FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT from the previous acharyas, second of all, even if he did, which he didn't, as members of ISKCON, we are to follow Srila Prabhupada. Now, I don't know if you are a member of ISKCON, I take it you are not, but still you should be able to appreciate the importance of the principle of being loyal to your guru and his institution. > I have come across this attitude in a few fanatic ISKCON devotees > before. However they do not realize the consequences of their > zealotism. When one only accepts one's own guru and rejects the rest of > the guruparampara (of which one's guru is a part) then one in fact > actually rejects his guru also. This is a false dichotomy. No one in ISKCON rejects the rest of the guru-parampara. > Therefore one must be able to understand ALL of the instructions of the > Parampara in context. In context of what? > Some persons would like Srila Prabhupada to stand alone in a sort of > spiritual vacuum as the only one with the absolute truth. No one is suggesting that, but it is a fact that Srila Prabhupada did what no one else did before him, i.e. he took the message of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to the West and spread it on a grand scale all over the rest of the world. In that sense he out-shines all previous acharyas and the rest of the Gaudiya Math. >This is not > the method of receiving the absolute truth. This is a strawman. Nobody has postulated that Srila Prabhupada is the only one with the absolute truth. >It is only received in the descending process. Right, ending with the present guru, whom the disciple takes his understanding from. In the case of ISKCON we all accept Srila Prabhupada as the pre-eminent siksha guru for all. >Srila Prabhupada told us that he was "simply > repeating the words of his guru maharaja" and following in the > footsteps of the previous Acharyas. He is the one who gave us in the > beginning of Bhagavad Gita As It Is the list of the guru parampara that > He Himself accepts. For us to reject these statements or this line > means that we also reject Srila Prabhupada. But no one has rejected these statements. > But neophytes are was > stated too wrapped up in the personality cult of their own guru to > realize that everybody's guru (even Srila Prabhupada) is someone else's > disciple, therefore if that guru has his own different philosophy it > cannot be in line with the guruparampara and is therefore known as > APA-SAMPRADAYA. I don't see the relevance of this point as this is not the case of ISKCON. >If you cannot reconcile the perceived differences > between guru in the parampara then your conclusion is that those who > differ from the parampara are APA-SAMPRADAYA. Please don't come to this > conclusion. I haven't seen anyone suggest such a conclusion. > Instead read ALL the instructions and understand how they > can be reconciled in context. You have no choice but to reconcile them > otherwise you must declare one right and another wrong. That is > small-mindedness and neophyte mentality. But you seem guilty of doing just that. > > That's what it means when we say > > Srila Prabhupada is the pre-eminent founder acharya of ISKCON. > > Yes, I agree with this. And ISKCON is a part of the Brahma Madhva > Gaudiya Sampradaya. Therefore ISKCON philosophy must also be the > philosophy not only of Srila Prabhupada but also of the whole Brahma > Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. You cannot say that they are unreconcilably > different. I have never said that. > > It is the duty of any ISKCON member to honor his allegiance to Srila > > Prabhupada by propagating his and only his version. > > NO, it is the duty of ISKCON members to reconcile Srila Prabhupada's > statements with the statements of all the other previous Acharyas in > the Brahma Madhva Gaudiya Sampradaya. They are non different. I agree totally. But in case of _perceived_ irreconcilable differences as in the case of the jiva issue, which literally caused some devotees to leave ISKCON, our duty is to adhere to and propagate Srila Prabhupada's version. >CIf you > think they are different then that is offensive and you are not > correct. Personally I don't see any differences nor do I think anyone in ISKCON thinks so. >Therefore think again. Understand these things in context. Which context? >And > if you can't then you need to ask your guru to help you understand. Right. And in the case of ISKCON the buck stops with Srila Prabhupada. He holds the last word as far as we are concerned. > > That does not mean we show disrespect > > to other acharyas or other Gaudiya maths or that we don't accept them. > > If you reject the ideas of the previous Acharyas of course you > disrespect not only them but also Srila Prabhupada who had absolute > faith in them. You are talking in riddles. What are you talking about? Which ideas of the previous acharyas is it that you think the neophytes in ISKCON have rejected? Can you be a little more specific? > As for other contemporary organizations they have to be > judged by the same standard that you judge anyone. Are they in line > with the standards of the sampradaya? Usually we judge by guru, sadhu and sastra. > > We respect them as Vaishnavas and accept that they have the right to > > hold > > different opinions, but we always favor Srila Prabhupada's version over > > their's. > > What we are talking about here is probably just details. Not > differences on siddhanta. If the siddhanta is different the it must be > another sampradaya. I agree, and I can't detect that anyone in ISKCON holds a different siddhanta than the previous acharyas of our sampradaya. > > So in that sense it not improper to think that 'we accept the > > teachings of the previous acaryas, only if they are in agreement with > > Srila > > Prabhupada's teachings. > > It certainly is offensive and Urmila and I and Isvara are telling you > this. Urmila mataji has told me no such thing. As for you and Ishvara I don't accept either of you as my authorities in anything. >We are senior devotees to you Are you sure? Senior how? I joined long before Ishvara. As for you, I don't even know who you are. May I ask who is your guru? >and if you do not accept this idea > please ask your guru. I think that you will find that he also agrees > with us that one must accept Srila Prabhupada's teachings are the same > (in essence if not in adjustable detail) with those of the previous > Acharyas. No one has suggested anything else. I don't see any dispute. > > So Srila Prabhupada is setting the example for us. > > Yes, Srila Prabhupada's example to us also is based on his presentation > to us of himself as a transparent via medium for the teachings of the > previous Acharyas. If you do not accept Srila Prabhupada is a > transparent via medium for the previous Acharyas teachings then that is > offensive. But I do. I accept that I understand the parampara through Srila Prabhupada. > > Actually it is. We worship the personality of Srila Prabhupada as the > > pre-eminent founder acharya of the International Society for Krishna > > Consciousness. > > Yes, Srila Prabhupada is certainly preeminent in ISKCON as the founder > Acharya of ISKCON. However this does not mean that he preached > something different from the rest of the Gaudiya Sampradaya or the > previous Acharyas. All of them are presenting the same thing. Of course. No one disputes this. >You, only have to understand his teachings in this way. It's actually the other way around. We have to understand the rest of the sampradaya in terms of Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Srila Prabhupada told us not to jump over the guru. > > That is a complete speculation. There is no basis what so ever for the > > assumption that there were certain aspects of the teachings of the > > previous > > acharyas Prabhupada was silent about pending the qualification of > > individual > > disciples. > > Actually you are wrong again, there are many times and places in Srila > Prabhupada's books where he mentions that one should read a particular > book when one is more advanced. Or where he indicated that we should > study some other Gaudiya sastras to get more information. Can you substantiate that assertion? >And even > during Srila Prabhupada's presence with us he introduced more complex > ideas and parts to our sadhana as we became more able to accept those > things. Can you give some examples? > > In fact, he said that all the knowledge we need in order to > > develop love for Krishna was given in the first canto of Srimad > > Bhagavatam. > > Again, you have taken ONE SINGLE EARLY QUOTE completely out of context. Do you mean to say that Srila Prabhupada didn't speak the truth when he said that he has given us everything we need in the first canto to go back to Godhead? > This cannot be accepted as an absolute instruction otherwise other > instructions for us to "read all my books" would have to be rejected. Where does 'instruction' come in? It was a statement from Srila Prabhupada, not an instruction. The statement: 'I have given you everything in the first canto' is not an instruction. > Please stop just quoting single specific instructions that in context > were very meaningful completely out of context. See above. No one has quoted any 'instructions.' >Yes, in one sense > everything is in the first canto, but also at the same time we have to > read other books of Srila Prabhupada but the first canto, like NOD, > Bhagavad Gita, Caitanya Caritamrta, etc, etc, etc. Of course. Personally I have read every single book Srila Prabhupada wrote. >Don't be so fanatic > that you think that you can quote just one quote and that all other > quotes mean nothing in comparison to it. That's just silly and > immature. I fail to see how I am guilty of that. > > That does not mean that there were certain aspects of the teachings of > > the > > previous acharyas that he kept silent about pending the qualifications > > of > > individual disciples. > > Actually that's exactly what is does mean. This is a very good example > of how Srila Prabhupada first of all instructed us on simple deity > worship and then later wanted us to follow Arcana Paddhati. If you > doubt this see http://geocities.com/deityworship. But how does the fact, that Srila Prabhupada directed us elsewhere in matters of the details of deity worship, in which he admitted he was not expert, justify the claim that he kept silent of certain aspects of the teachings of the acharyas pending the qualifications of individual disciples? Are you suggesting that none of Srila Prabhupada's disciples were mature enough to bear the full Gaudiya-vaishnava siddhanta?, and that he kept certain aspects of the siddhanta from them? Apart from certain details of deity-worship, which in your mind seem to qualify as 'certain aspects of the teachings of the previous acharyas' what aspects might you be alluding to that Prabhupada kept from us? > > He may have kept certain details of deity-worship from > > us because he didn't see them as important for the preaching mission, > > and > > because he didn't want to overwhelm us. > > Not that they were not important but that they were not important in > the beginning. And yes, he did not indicate that we need to follow > everything in Hari Bhakti Vilasa, only what is in Arcana Paddhati. You > are correct that he did not want to overwhelm us in the beginning. And > we all saw how he trained us slowly and added things as the movement > grew not all at once. This is clear. But he didn't keep anything from us, as you were asserting. Everything is there in his books. The full Gaudiya-vaishnava siddhanta is present in his books, don't you agree? > > It means that we accept Srila Prabhupada's instructions on the number > > of > > rounds we chant over those of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja. > Both are correct. Neither is wrong. No one has said either of them are wrong. But in the case of difference in instructions between the acharyas we follow Prabhupada. >Lord Caitanya's standard was 64 > rounds, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's standard was 64 rounds, Srila > Prabhupada's standard in the beginning was 64 rounds, then he adjusted > it to 16 rounds MINIMUM. 16 is not the number, it is the MINIMUM. We > cannot say that there is a difference. If there is no difference between chanting 16 and 64 rounds a day, why don't everyone just cant 64 rounds a day, or 192 rounds a day like haridas Thakur? What stops us if there is no difference? >We have to reconcile these seemingly different instructions. And so we do by following Srila Prabhupada's instruction of chanting minimum 16 rounds a day. > One should always remember Lord Visnu > (Krsna) and never forget him, all rules and regulations are subservient > to these two. This is a quote from Rupa Goswami's Bhakti Rasamrta > Sindhu and also Srila Prabhupada's Nectar of Devotion. So many times > Srila Prabhupada said like this that the real goal is not the number of > rounds that you chant (although he was very strict that he didn't want > us to do less than 16 minimum) but he wanted us to be Krsna conscious > 24 hours a day. Right. > > Obviously we cannot follow all the instructions of all the acharyas so > > we > > limit ourselves to follow those of our founder acharya. > > This is not obvious. To me it is. >You can certainly follow all the instructions of > all the previous Acharyas. Obviously not. I know very few devotees who can or even have time to chant 64 rounds a day. That's why Srila Prabhupada, seeing our short-comings and being very merciful towards us reduced the daily number of rounds recommended by the previous acharyas. >That's why they gave those instructions. For > people to follow them. But we can't follow the 64 rounds a day rule, so Prabhupada mercifully lowered it. > That's why they wrote those books. For people to > read and follow them. Srila Prabhupada wrote his books for his devotees to read and follow them, yes. And he also wrote them for all the rest of the world, for whom the teachings of the previous acharyas otherwise would have been inaccessible. The fact is that if it weren't for Srila Prabhupada's books and ISKCON no one in the world, except for a few Vaishnavas sitting in their little maths in India, would have had the slightest clue about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the writings of the Gaudiya-vaishnavas. > Now, admittedly there may be some detailed > instructions of the previous Acharyas and also of Srila Prabhupada that > are optional or that are meant only for particular time, place and > circumstances or particular disciples. Right. > > One must be absolutely faithful to Srila Prabhupada and his > > institution to make tangible advancement in devotional service. > > One must be absolutely faithful to ALL Srila Prabhupada's instructions > and not just the one's one thinks he would like to follow. And one must > at the same time be absolutely faithful to the whole parampara. One is faithful to the whole parampara by being absolutely and exclusively faithful to Srila Prabhupada's version. One of Srila Prabhupada's instructions was for his followers to not go outside of ISKCON to receive spiritual instructions. Obviously you are not following that instruction and so you are not fit to instruct anyone in Srila Prabhupada's teachings > > In fact, Srila Prabhupada > > went so far as to say, that if anyone thinks they can go outside of > > these > > walls (of ISKCON) to make spiritual advancement they are greatly > > deluded. > > This is also quoted out of context. Do you even know the context of > this quote. This quote has to do with those who left ISKCON to follow > Siddhasvarupa Goswami in Hawaii. Actually, the quote came from Srila Prabhupada when he was sitting in Krisna-Balaram Mandir in Vrindavan and seeing several devotees going around to different local maths to seek sanga. >It does not apply to those following > other bonafide Vaisnava sampradayas or groups. And this you know because of...? >CIf you think that they > you are deluded and do not understand the context of this quote. What makes you so sure YOU are not deluded and have not understood the context of the quote? >Once > again since you were not there and we were and since your knowledge is > simply based on pulling random quotes out of context which anyone with > a computer and vedabase can do, you should probably take advantage of > some older godbrother's instructions on this matter. Were YOU there? As far as I can gather you have only recently received initiation, right? And you are not even in ISKCON. May I ask you, what makes such an expert in Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON? ys, jdd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 > >We are senior devotees to you > > Are you sure? Senior how? I joined long before Ishvara. As for you, I > don't even know who you are. May I ask who is your guru? > Jahnu Dvipa Prabhu, apparently, you are devoid of lots of facts. I joined ISKCON in 1977, and Gaura Kesava Prabhu is a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2004 Report Share Posted October 14, 2004 Dear Urmila Mataji, PAMHO. AGTSP. >> For me the bench mark is Srila Prabhupada. What his predecessors say or >> his successors say, I will accept only if it is in agreement with Srila >> Prabhupada. > I hope I'm correct in assuming that you don't think Rupa Gosvami to be > "wrong," just that one should follow one's own guru's instructions. > Indeed, > Rupa Gosvami himelf states as much in the same book--that all must accept > a > guru, and the details will then differ according to the guru. You are correct in your assumption. > Well, if you regularly read Bhagavatam, which is Prabhupada's > instructions, > then in effect you *are* chanting all the mantras and prayers contained > therein. I agree. > Are you implying that devotees who also like to sing the songs of > Bhaktivinoda, etc. are puffed-up and think themselves higher than > neophytes? > Should they cease all such bhajanas and simply chant Hare Krishna? :-) No not at all. > I'm sure you do not mean that, but your statements come across like that. You can be double sure of that, that I did not mean that way. > Your preaching to that group is a very enlivening story. Preaching to > "Hindus" has its own flavor and necessities. It is rewriting and not just writing so it is a bit more challenging. Before coming to ISKCON our family diety is Tirupathi Venkateswara (Balaji) and my wife's family deity is Lord Narasingadev. All our life we have been worshipping all Vishnu forms but still totally confused, until we came to Srila Prabhupada. So wee I was only talking about our focus and core subject is Hare Krishna. Enclosed please find one photograph of the Radha-Krishna throne, so you may begin constructing it as soon as possible. When the Radha-Krishna Deities are installed, you may turn your main attention to Them, rather than to the Lord Jagannatha Deities. You continue to keep Jagannatha nicely though, and sometimes change His dress.--------------Srila Prabhupada letter Another, Krishna has got many names: nämnäm akäri bahudhä nija-sarva-saktis. So of all the names, two names are very important: Räma and Kåñëa. Therefore in the Hare Kåñëa mantra, the Räma and Kåñëa are there, and Kåñëa's potency, Hare. So in the çästra it is said that one thousand names of Viñëu... There is Viñëu's one thousand names, viñëu-sahasra-näma. If one chants Viñëu's names-there are thousands-that is equal to one name Räma. And three times chanting the name of Räma is equal to one "Kåñëa." Therefore we should take advantage to chant Hare Kåñëa. Although there are many names of Kåñëa, Kåñëa is the chief name, mukha, and Lord Caitanya chanted Hare Kåñëa, Hare Kåñëa, Kåñëa Kåñëa, Hare Hare/ Hare Räma, Hare Räma, Räma Räma, Hare Hare. So we should follow Lord Caitanya's footsteps. **Although Kåñëa has got many names, we should, by following the footsteps of Lord Caitanya Mahäprabhu, we should take advantage of chanting this Hare Kåñëa mantra.** Go on.----------Srila Prabhupada Conversation. Let me clarify I am not trying to offend other incarnations of Krishna and other sampradayas, previous, present or future acaryas. Hare Krishna, Your humbles servant, Bhadra Govinda Dasa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2004 Report Share Posted October 15, 2004 > Jahnu Dvipa Prabhu, apparently, you are devoid of lots of facts. I joined > ISKCON in 1977, Is that why you tell people where ever you go that you are disciple of Srila Prabhupada? How can we trust what you say? >and Gaura Kesava Prabhu is a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada. He was initiated in 1976, which would indicate he is a junior disciple of Srila Prabhupada, and certainly junior to Jayapataka Maharaja, who he is criticizing, so if you want to talk about 'senior' disciples, then let's get it straight, shall we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2004 Report Share Posted October 16, 2004 Dear Jahnu Dvipa das JPS, On Oct 15, 2004, at 4:09 AM, Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN) wrote: >> and Gaura Kesava Prabhu is a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada. > > He was initiated in 1976, which would indicate he is a junior disciple > of > Srila Prabhupada, and certainly junior to Jayapataka Maharaja, who he > is > criticizing, so if you want to talk about 'senior' disciples, then > let's get > it straight, shall we? Please note that I never said that I was a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada's, however I am more senior than you. And I am still a godbrother of your guru and although he joined long before me any Prabhupada disciple even a junior one has been initiated at least 27 years. I was active in ISKCON and met Srila Prabhupada at least three or four years before I could join full time and got initiated due to the fact that I was underage and still in high school. Legally I needed my parents permission to join (which they would not give before my high school graduation as my father is a lawyer). I explained this personally to Srila Prabhupada at the 1976 Mayapur festival. He told me that it was not an impediment to my devotional service that my father was a demon just like Prahlada Maharaja. Also I never criticized Jayapataka Swami, your guru. The criticism was of you not him. If you take it as a criticism of him that is again your misconception. sincerely, Gaura Keshava das Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2004 Report Share Posted October 16, 2004 > > > Jahnu Dvipa Prabhu, apparently, you are devoid of lots of facts. I > > joined ISKCON in 1977, > > Is that why you tell people where ever you go that you are disciple of > Srila Prabhupada? How can we trust what you say? I am as a disciple of Srila Gour Govinda Maharaja and a disciple of Srila Prabhupada. Besides that, I have nothing else to prove to you. > >and Gaura Kesava Prabhu is a senior disciple of Srila Prabhupada. > > He was initiated in 1976, which would indicate he is a junior disciple of > Srila Prabhupada, and certainly junior to Jayapataka Maharaja, who he is > criticizing, so if you want to talk about 'senior' disciples, then let's > get it straight, shall we? Actually, over the time, what I have discovered about you is you take pleasure in denigrading and insulting other devotees. This I have found out by reading various postings you put on the PAMHO discussions. Maybe many devotees like myself deserve that. In a sense, it is virtually time wasting have any dialog with you. As for me, you will never again see me responding to anything you have to say. Hare Krishna, Isvara dasa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 16, 2004 Report Share Posted October 16, 2004 > Please note that I never said that I was a senior disciple of Srila > Prabhupada's, however I am more senior than you. Please note that I wasn't responding to you but to Ishvara. <snip> > Also I never criticized Jayapataka Swami, your guru. The criticism was > of you not him. If you take it as a criticism of him that is again your > misconception. To say that, "(Oh dear, do we have another disciple of Jayapataka Swami who needs to study all of Srila Prabhupada's instructions???)" is derogatory towards Jayapataka Swami. If you didn't mean to belittle JPS by implying that none of his disciples know all of Srila Prabhupada's teachings why single him out by saying "another disciple of Jayapataka Swami"? Besides, I find you and others who left ISKCON quick to brandish slogans around like ISKCON fanatics and ISKCON neophytes, which I find offensive in the extreme towards ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada. Lets once and for all kill the notion of the ISKCON fanatics and the ISKCON neophytes and bury it deep in the ground where it belongs. The simple fact is that if we take a calm and dispassionate look at reality we find that in general devotees within ISKCON are more mature, more advanced, more dedicated, have a better grasp on Vedanta philosophy, are more well-versed in Srila Prabhupada's books, have more organized programs to study Srila Prabhupada's teachings, are more strict in their sadhana, have researched different controversial philosophical issues more thoroughly and systematically, are distributing more books, and, most of all, please Srila Prabhupada more than any of those devotees who left ISKCON to take shelter of other Gaudiya Maths. 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.