Real Action

[Guest guest]

> The relation is our attitude and behavior, towards his Divine

> grace--who is Krsna incarnate in the form of His pure devotee (study this

> ideology in Cc. Adilila 1.44-61). How can bhaktas see Krsna as everything

> else (i.e., vasudevah sarvam iti, sarvam khalv idam brahma, etc.), but NOT

> as their own guru? Unlike realization of mere jnana, pure devotion

> involves real action :-), seva. All sevakas serve our sevya-bhagavan

> through our sevaka-bhagavan. This is "nityam bhagavata-sevaya." Our

> ideology is useless until it is applied, and our applied ideology is

> normative in this respect (i.e., how to respect one's guru); it's already

> well established. There are standard injunctions regulating worship of the

> bonafide guru, whom we are enjoined to view and serve as our manifestation

> of Bhagavan. Envious people become impersonalists because in bhakti such

> things are just way *too clear* for comfort. Same goes for those who lack

> faith.

 

That was a really nice explanation - thank you. I like this also:

 

"It is said that one can neither see, hear, understand nor perceive the

Supreme Lord, KŠa, by the material senses. But if one is engaged in loving

transcendental service to the Lord from the beginning, then one can see the

Lord by revelation. Every living entity is only a spiritual spark; therefore

it is not possible to see or to understand the Supreme Lord. Arjuna, as a

devotee, does not depend on his speculative strength; rather, he admits his

limitations as a living entity and acknowledges KŠa’s inestimable

position. Arjuna could understand that for a living entity it is not

possible to understand the unlimited infinite. If the infinite reveals

Himself, then it is possible to understand the nature of the infinite by the

grace of the infinite. The word yogevara is also very significant here

because the Lord has inconceivable power. If He likes, He can reveal Himself

by His grace, although He is unlimited. Therefore Arjuna pleads for the

inconceivable grace of KŠa. He does not give KŠa orders. KŠa is not

obliged to reveal Himself unless one surrenders fully in KŠa consciousness

and engages in devotional service. Thus it is not possible for persons who

depend on the strength of their mental speculations to see KŠa."

Bg 11.5

 

> Of course--many of us have pretty bad karma, even though we may also

> have faith in Krsna. Hence we will even challenge standard siddhanta due

> to our misfortune, despite the fact that karma is beyond our ken of

> reason.

 

Prabhupada said that karma was practically impossible to understand, but

would he have meant the intricate details and workings of it, as opposed to

the actual concept of karma, which itself is really quite a simple one, in

some respects?

 

Ys

Braja Sevaki dd

[Guest guest]

> I would rather say we probably brought it in with us at the

> outset, or perhaps tried to repress it for a while. But it's also

> true that some of our bogus gurus have agreed to accept some of

> these folks as devotees.

> The sentimantality which ignores such real

> and heirarchical distinctions extends from the kind of impersonalism

> Prabhupada intended to destroy (pascatya-desa tarine). By bad

> association we forget and ignore that. But we all choose our

> associations, don't we?

 

That is true except on COM. On COM one cannot choose his own

association, other than by simply leaving COM. That's of course one

way to do it, but I find I also meet many nice devotees on COM.

 

> Yes, Krsna polarizes people in this way; or perhaps I should

> say His satsanga polarizes the asuras and the suras.

 

 

Gour Govinda Maharaj once made a very interesting comment - one that

was, in hindsight, more of a premonition.

 

At the time when the Narayana Maharaj issue was at its peak, Tamal

Krishna Goswami, Bhurijana Prabhu, and Giriraj Swami were very much in

the spotlight. They were 'banned' from Vrindavan, and told to suspend

initiations for a while.

 

Maharaja said that when a fire is lit there is danger and cause of

much damage. But the fire also causes all kinds of snakes to come out.

Gaur Govinda Maharaja said that the 3 devotees mentiomed were being

'trialled by fire' because Krishna knew they could take it, but the

real thing to watch for were the snakes that would come wriggling out.

How true that turned out to be. Where are these 3 devotees now? Still

loyally serving Srila Prabhupada, still very fixed up in Krishna

consciousness. But the snakes have left...

 

A very senior devotee once told me that Narayan Maharaja had done

ISKCON a big favor because he had freed ISKCON from a lot a bad

elements that ISKCON was anyway better left without.

 

Ys, Jahnu das

[Guest guest]

At 03:35 AM 2/26/02 +1000, Jahnu (das) (San Rafael, CA - USA) wrote:

>A very senior devotee once told me that Narayan Maharaja had done

>ISKCON a big favor because he had freed ISKCON from a lot a bad

>elements that ISKCON was anyway better left without.

 

I have a question, and, please it is a perfectly innocent question, not a

veiled challenge. I've always wondered what devotees mean by the term

"senior devotee." Could you please share your definition?

 

Thanks.

 

Your aspiring servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

At 05:39 AM 2/26/2002 +1000, you wrote:

> > I have a question, and, please it is a perfectly innocent question,

> > not a veiled challenge. I've always wondered what devotees mean by

> > the term "senior devotee." Could you please share your definition?

>

>To me a senior devotee, apart from his or her many years of unbroken

>service, is someone who has given their life and soul to Srila

>Prabhupada's mission. A senior devotee I consider someone who can

>inpsire in me unflinching faith and conviction in Srila Prabhupada.

>

>In the NOD Rupa Goswami describes that one of the adhikaris of an

>uttama devotee is that he can defeat any argument by his knowledge of

>scripture, and that under no circumstances can his faith in the Lord

>be disrupted by such arguments.

 

Noted. Thanks so much, prabhu.

 

Your aspiring servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

>

> A very senior devotee once told me that Narayan Maharaja had done

> ISKCON a big favor because he had freed ISKCON from a lot a bad

> elements that ISKCON was anyway better left without.

 

And the opposite camp runs the opposite propaganada agenda:

That all what was good has already left ISKCON. In the words

of NM himself, who could be called "a very senior" devotee

too.

 

 

- mnd

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Jahnu (das) (San Rafael, CA - USA) wrote:

> > I would rather say we probably brought it in with us at the

> > outset, or perhaps tried to repress it for a while. But it's also

> > true that some of our bogus gurus have agreed to accept some of

> > these folks as devotees.

> > The sentimantality which ignores such real

> > and heirarchical distinctions extends from the kind of impersonalism

> > Prabhupada intended to destroy (pascatya-desa tarine). By bad

> > association we forget and ignore that. But we all choose our

> > associations, don't we?

> That is true except on COM. On COM one cannot choose his own

> association, other than by simply leaving COM. That's of course one

> way to do it, but I find I also meet many nice devotees on COM.

 

I see your point; the kind of abuse we're talking about sometimes

comes unexpected, and is thus sort of like terrorism, which no one can

ever fully prepare for. But responsible leaders can address those who

harbor known terrorists, and moderators can address this problem if

they choose; I feel they have an ethical responsibility to explain

why they don't, as was the case on TD. This is only one of many reasons

it is a matter of concern that TD moderators tolerated so much of it.

 

 

 

(Gour Govinda)

> Maharaja said that when a fire is lit there is danger and cause of

> much damage. But the fire also causes all kinds of snakes to come out.

> Gaur Govinda Maharaja said that the 3 devotees mentiomed were being

> 'trialled by fire' because Krishna knew they could take it,

 

As a matter of fact, this is exactly what Srila Prabhupada said

about H.H. Tamala Krsna Gosvami, when his Divine grace chose him to go to

Communist China. He said TKG could face fire unmoved.

 

 

 

> A very senior devotee once told me that Narayan Maharaja had done

> ISKCON a big favor because he had freed ISKCON from a lot a bad

> elements that ISKCON was anyway better left without.

 

However, I have seen that H.H. Narayana Maharaja has really helped

a lot of devotees who were already down and out, so to speak. So although

in one sense, we can see that his followers are primarily the rejects and

losers of ISKCON, at the same time, he has been able to help them now more

than ISKCON could. The most unfortunate thing I've noticed is that many

of the same ones who caused problems in ISKCON are now causing problems

for Narayana Maharaja. Hitopadesa says one's conditional nature

(svabhava) stands out above everything else, no matter how much

reformation one undergoes.

 

MDd