Regarding Kanti dd's comments against sannyasis/mendicants...

[Guest guest]

> I don't think that anyone would argue against your premise in this

> posting. Many are not coming up to the standard. I would think that is

> inarguable.

>

> So we can see we have a problem here. In troubleshooting, my understanding

> is that the first step is to find out the problem. So we can see that by

> your criticism of the GBC and sanyasis, that you are agreeing that the

> standard to be followed for our movement is that set by Srila Prabhupada.

> So if we are going to fix things, then let us go back and find out what

> Prabhupada had to say about these issues. Then let us decide how to get

> there. Together!

>

>

> > Wandering mendicant? Which ones don't have bank accounts? How many are

> > on special diets? What about the ones who have purchased homes? Is this

> > not a contradiction? In our society today it is usually the householders

> > who are mendicants not the sannyasis. You are still expecting women to

> > come up to some ideal standard but you do not expect the sannyasis to do

> > the same. If their goal was simply to serve Krsna in a mood of

> > renounciation, why not

> just

> > stay lifelong bramacari? It is a humble and renounced position in

> > society with no confusion about power and prestige. yhs, Kanti dasi

 

>From a lecture by Srila Prabhupada at Calcutta, June 30, '73;

 

> So this jnana and vairagya can be achieved simply by becoming a devotee of

> Väsudeva. That is the verdict of Srimad-Bhägavatam. Väsudeve bhagavati

> bhakti-yogaù prayojitaù, janayaty asu vairägyam. Äsu vairägya, very soon.

> Just like these boys, these American, these European boys, they are young

> men. Now they have taken sannyäsa and dedicated their life for service of

> Krsna. They are vairägya. They are coming from opulent nation, very rich

> men, rich nation. Their parents are very rich. There is no scarcity of

> food. There is no scarcity of money. There is no scarcity of women in the

> western countries. But they have left everything. Simply boys. They are

> all within thirty. How much a young man may have propensities for enjoying

> this material way of life! And when there is facilities. But how they have

> taken to it? This is the proof.

 

Because some of Srila Prabhupada's sannyas disciples fell by the wayside...

should you condemn all his sannyas disciples wholesale?

 

Is that fair? How can you make such a sweeping generalization? Don't you

think that Srila Prabhupada had a purpose when he "awarded" them or rather

initiated them as sannyasis?

 

Again, Srila Prabhupada in a lecture on Nov. 14, '74 at Bombay;

 

> So a devotee, whoever he may be, everyone, for everyone, the path of

> devotion is open. Mäm hi pärtha vyapäsritya ye ’pi syuh päpa-yonayah.

> Krsna says personally. It doesn’t matter, päpa-yoni, low-grade family,

> päpa-yonayaù, if he takes shelter of Krsna. Striyo vaisyäs tathä südräs te

> ’pi yänti paräà gatim. And Sukadeva Gosvämi says,

> kiräta-hüëändhra-pulinda-pulkaçä äbhéra-çumbhä yavanäù khasädayaù ye ’nye

> ca päpä, ye anye ca päpä yad-apäçrayäçrayäù çudhyanti. Kåñëa consciousness

> is so nice. It is all-embracing. There are many... Tyaktvä sva-dharmaà

> caraëämbujaà hareù, patet tato yadi, bhajann apakvo ’tha. Tyaktvä

> sva-dharmam. Sva-dharmam means everyone has got his occupational duty,

> sva-dharmam. Generally, we consider brähmaëa, kñatriya, vaiçya, çüdra.

> They have got their sva-dharma. Brähmaëa has got his duties, kñatriya has

> got his duty. Cätur-varëyaà mayä-såñöaà guëa-karma-vibhägaçaù. So

> sva-dharma means... Suppose one gives up his occupational duty and takes

> to Krsna consciousness, tyaktvä sva-dharmaà caraëämbujaà hareù, and takes

> to the shelter of Krsna, but bhajann apakvaù, could not mature his

> devotional service, bhajann apakvo ’tha patet tato yadi, and he falls

> down... This is Närada’s statement. So he says, “What is the loss even if

> he falls down? By sentiment he comes to Krsna consciousness, and even if

> he falls down, still, where is the loss? And contrary to this, a man who

> is performing very perfectly his sva-dharma, but has no Krsna

> consciousness, then what is the gain?” There is no gain.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/28/1999 10:40:26 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

 

> But they have left everything.

 

I made no comments against sannyasis or mendicants.

 

My question is, have they left everything? Are they simply depending on Krsna

and not on owning property or having bank balance or the special arrangements

of temple managers?

 

I did not make the wholesale condemnation as you imply in your post. It is a

rhetorical question that one must answer oneself. It is a question of the

heart and between them and Srila Prabhupada and Krsna. It is a question that

every devotee must pose him or herself.

 

But the external , therefore apparent standard is much higher for a sannyasi

than a householder ( or a woman for that matter). So while some are not above

reproach, they continue to be part of a group that is critical of women (or

men who protect these "unworthy" women) and this is why I posed the question.

One cannot assume that because a devotee carries a danda he has given up

every desire for power and prestige just as one cannot assume that he has

not. Some have indeed qiven up everything and use everything in Krsna's

service in other words genuine mendicants and some have made personal

arrangements for comfort and care.

 

Indeed there are some householders who have given up as much or more just as

there are some who have given up little. But again, the standard is not as

high for a householder as for the renounced order and there is a learning

curve involved in the grhasta ashram that is a bit more forgiving. It is not

important that I or anyone else know who is who, because Krsna knows,

therefore it is important that we treat every aspiring vaisnava with respect.

yhs, Kanti dasi