a counter example / Beware of Kali's agents

[Guest guest]

> >

> > They could have gone, for example, on a vacation with their families

> > and gotten much closer or resolved some issues as a result of just

> > playing together,

> > etc. and then they come back more peaceful and thus in a better position

> > to serve Krsna, particularly if before the trip they were having

> > difficulties.

>

> If a person's material circumstances change, that may sometimes

> provide an opportunity to take devotional service more seriously. But

> materical circumstances are fleeting and limited to affecting the body,

> mind and intellect. If a person feels some impetus to spiritual activity

> due to some material rearrangement, it will only be maintained by actual

> contact with the genuinely spiritual.

>

> In other words, we cannot rely on material circumstances and events

> to sustain our spirituality because they will constantly change, and they

> are limited. Thus those who approach God for material benefits or relief

> tend to fall away as soon as the material goal is accomplised. Association

> of devotees is the primary way to increase initial faith, and acceptance

> of spiritual practices are the only way to sustain and develop it.

 

Well said.

[Guest guest]

> > I forgot to mention that some devotees have said that their experiences

> > with LSD opened them up in a way that they could be receptive to Eastern

> > philosophy and thus more easily be open to KC. Of course, we don't

> > recommend people

> > take LSD, but it seems to have helped some people come to KC.

>

> There is no evidence that drugs have ever helped anyone come to

> Krsna consciousness. If they had, then drugs would be a legitimate

> spiritual experience. What helped these people come to Krsna consciousness

> was their inherent tendency towards it. The drugs simply disturbed their

> perceptions of external reality. But the realization that something exists

> beyond this material phenomenon came from within. Mostly with devotees it

> is because they had some previous realization of spiritual life before

> this lifetime and at a certain point that re-exerted itself, when the

> external circumstances were disturbed. That's all drugs do, they disturb,

> they do not enlighten.

>

> Your humble servant,

> Hari-sauri dasa

 

Very well written, Hari Sauri Prabhu. Thank you very much for these

pertinent comments.

 

I hate to say it, but those remarks reminded me about SP's comments about

the "hippie seed" still being inside us.... and now, 30 odd years later,

those remarks "ring true"!

 

Of course, all of the "ku-samskaras" - bad impressions on the mind - that I

too have within my consciousness, I view as a "bane" and not something that

"brought me to KC"!

 

das,

 

Basu Ghosh Das

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/23/2006 9:20:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

Of course, all of the "ku-samskaras" - bad impressions on the mind - that I

too have within my consciousness, I view as a "bane" and not something that

"brought me to KC"!

 

 

 

All our material experiences frustrated us and this helped bring us to KC,

or at least make us open to it when we were exposed to it. Unless one is

frustrated in material existence, one will not seriously take to KC. Of course,

 

not every materially frustrated soul comes to KC and not every soul with tons

of

pious acts and good samskaras comes either.

 

When looking back at my life I feel that the many material activities I

performed all helped me because I wasn't happy with them and thus was searching

 

for something better. Fortunately I met the devotees and found Krsna. I was

totally ready when I met them. I was materially exhausted. Was I have been

ready

before I did sex, drugs and rock? Not at all.

 

Your servant,

Mahatma das

[Guest guest]

> All our material experiences frustrated us and this helped bring us to KC,

> or at least make us open to it when we were exposed to it. Unless one is

> frustrated in material existence, one will not seriously take to KC. Of

> course, not every materially frustrated soul comes to KC and not every

> soul with tons of pious acts and good samskaras comes either.

>

> When looking back at my life I feel that the many material activities I

> performed all helped me because I wasn't happy with them and thus was

> searching for something better. Fortunately I met the devotees and found

> Krsna. I was totally ready when I met them. I was materially exhausted.

> Was I have been ready before I did sex, drugs and rock? Not at all.

 

You may have become materially frustrated after experiencing drugs

etc. but the point is that it was not drugs that led you to Krsna

consciousness. There are millions of drugs users all over the world but they

don't take to Krsna consciousness. It was a combination of Krsna and Srila

Prabhupada's mercy, and your own inherent willingness to receive it.

Whatever our material experiences are, they have no bearing on developing

Krsna consciousness.

 

This was the mistake that Jayatirtha fell into. He thought that

because he was an LSD taker before joining, then that was instrumental in

his taking to Krsna consciousness. Thus he again began to think LSD could

enhance his experiences as a devotee. He linked the drug use with his

spiritual life. Instead the drugs destroyed his devotional life. Drugs

cannot have any positive effect, period. And you don't need to do drugs, sex

and rock & roll in order to understand the frustrations of material life.

 

Your humble servant,

Hari-sauri dasa

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/24/2006 2:50:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

Hari.Sauri.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

It was a combination of Krsna and Srila

Prabhupada's mercy, and your own inherent willingness to receive it.

Whatever our material experiences are, they have no bearing on developing

Krsna consciousness.

 

 

 

The material world was facilitates bringing us back to Godhead. That is the

ultimate purpose of material creation. I meant that the nature of material

activities is that they lead pious people to God (catur vidha bhajate mam). I

didn't mean that material activities awaken bhakti.

 

Ys, Md

[Guest guest]

My Lord, Your Lordship can easily be approached, but only by those who are

materially exhausted. One who is on the path of [material] progress, trying

to improve himself with respectable parentage, great opulence, high

education and bodily beauty, cannot approach You with sincere

feeling.---Queen Kunti

[Guest guest]

Dandavad. Prabhupada kijaya!

 

I have been observing this discussion off in one and this morning I had some

concerns which I would like to share (and a few spare minutes to write

them).

 

I'm concerned about how to determine what is useful for progress in Krishna

consciousness.

 

Srila Prabhupada taught us "yukta-vairagya" and expected us to use our

intelligence to discern how we can utilize the material world in our efforts

to become Krishna conscious and to give Krishna consciousness to others.

 

At the same time, he taught us that Krishna consciousness is not dependent

on any material support.

 

So one challenge appears to be understanding how to "use" something material

without becoming "dependent" on it.

 

Another challenge is to be able to distinguish when something appears to

have some utility, but is in the long run detrimental.

 

This thread mainly deals with one kind of material support, broadly termed

as "psychology."

 

Within this broad term I believe we all agree that there are certainly some

situations where the tools of the modern psychology profession can be

useful, especially when someone is suffering from severe mental illness.

 

But where we seem to disagree is on the usefulness of psychological tools

for personal growth in the absence of any substantial mental illness (of

course, Srila Prabhupada has pointed out that in the material world we are

all more or less crazy, but I think you understand what I mean).

 

Personally, I am divided on this issue.

 

On the one hand, I do not believe we should reject a technique for personal

growth and introspection simply because it comes from outside our tradition.

 

For example, I have used Stephen Covey's simple list of seven habits as a

commonsense guide for some aspects of my development in personal

relationships.

 

On the other hand, I share the concern that has been voiced in this dialogue

about personal growth work that is largely based on the transformational

psychology work of Werner Erhard, who pioneered this in the early 70s (a la

EST).

 

His approach is summarized as follows

(http://www.wernererhard.com/wernererhardinfluence.htm)

 

"Transformation, according to Erhard, creates a clear distinction between

changing an existing model (no matter how significantly) and creating an

entirely new model. This thinking gave rise to the idea that human beings

could transform their lives in a very short period of time yielding

powerful, long-lasting results. "

 

It would seem that any technique like this if it could be used to transform

our lives towards enhanced Krishna consciousness, would be welcome in the

same spirit as we adopt other material techniques in our practice.

 

However, the very nature of the psychological power of these techniques also

makes them dangerous, especially when the practitioner is dealing with a

varied group of individuals and thus sets aside any specific spiritual

values or principles in favor of "empowering" the individuals to find their

own "truths."

 

One of the unfortunate qualities of the modern age is the systematic

"dis-empowerment" of both individuals and communities in favor of fitting

into a materialistic mold that drives a consumeristic society.

 

In our movement we have also seen this at times, with disastrous results.

 

Therefore, I can understand how some devotees are seeking the benefits that

personal transformation techniques offer, not as a replacement for the

practice of Krishna consciousness but as a tool to strengthen their ability

to practice this process.

 

But, to be effective, for our Krishna conscious goal, I agree that those

offering these techniques must first of all be very well grounded in Krishna

consciousness and, what is most important, offer them within the context of

devotional service, rather than in some generic "empowerment" ideal.

 

For example, I have been recently invited to a japa enhancement retreat to

be conducted by a leading sanyassi.

 

Now, "retreats" are a common part of the personal transformation toolkit.

And, I doubt that Srila Prabhupada ever spoke of this as a tool for Krishna

consciousness.

 

Still, I believe that this will be a great opportunity for personal

transformation and growth, without so much danger of Maya's influence as I

see in those courses which are wholly focused on "personal transformation"

without any direct reference to the practice of sadhana- bhakti.

 

In conclusion, I agree that personal transformation work can help in our

pursuit of Krishna consciousness, but I also agree that Krishna

consciousness is not dependent on this work. And I agree that without a

direct framework of Krishna consciousness, personal transformation work can

sometimes harm a devotees progress.

 

Where that puts me in this debate, I'm not sure, but there it is anyhow.

 

Your servant,

Pancharatna dasa

[Guest guest]

Dear Pancharatna Prabhu and others, please accept my humble obeisances. All

glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

As regards to evaluating modern psychology as a material thing that can be

used in Krishna's service, it differs from many other material things in

that its techniques and methods are directed at understanding the self.

Evaluating the usefulness of other things--televisions, cars, computers,

programming languages, tax laws, etc.--do not have these considerations

because these are things that a person uses, they are not the person

herself. The subject of psychology, however, is the person. As such, its

practical application, also known as psychotherapy, is inextricably bound up

with notions about the self and how we can understand ourselves for the sake

of improving our own lives. Modern psychology is therefore quite different

from most other material things, so it must be specially considered.

 

Because psychology is based on particular notions of the self, there is

necessarily a philosophical system that stands behind it. Belief in the

efficacy of psychology will therefore be tied to the extent one believes in

the precepts and assumptions that comprise that psychology's underlying

philosophical system. If you have faith in that system, you will also faith

in the efficacy of psychotherapy; if you don't at heart accept its

underlying philosophical precepts, then it won't work for you. That is why

it is not possible to separate psychotherapeutic technique from its

underlying philosophy. To do so would be like cutting off a leg from a

three-legged stool. If you cut off a leg, the stool won't work anymore. In

the same way, if you reject the philosophy behind psychotherapy, you won't

have sufficient faith to believe that it will be effective. That is why we

cannot talk of psychotherapy as merely another "tool" like a drill or a

pencil.

 

Since any psychology is founded on a philosophical system, irregardless of

whether therapists and their clients are aware of that system, in evaluating

psychology we must ask to what extent its underlying philosophical system is

compatible with our Krishna conscious philosophical system. Because both

systems are aimed at understanding and improving the self, we are comparing

similar things. At the philosophical level we are comparing apples with

apples.

 

I'm not going to go into details here about the similarities and differences

that the philosophies behind various psychologies have with Krishna

consciousness, but I will point out that there are different psychologies

and that underlying philosophies of some are more compatible with Krishna

consciousness than others.

 

The great majority of devotees who have entered the therapeutic profession

seem to have adopted a psychology that has existentialism as its

philosophical basis. As to whether existentialism and Krishna consciousness

are compatible, and how their philosophical systems result in different

techniques, I've described at length in an essay titled "An Examination of

Psychotherapy and Its Compatibility with Krishna Cosciousness" available at

http://www.siddhanta.com/2005/11/the_essentials_.html

 

For the sake of evaluating a particular psychology's possible use and

fitness for spiritual advancement, one must evaluate its underlying

philosophical system.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das

 

 

On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 15:23 -0400, Pancaratna ACBSP <

Pancaratna.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote:

>

> Dandavad. Prabhupada kijaya!

>

> I have been observing this discussion off in one and this morning I had

> some

> concerns which I would like to share (and a few spare minutes to write

> them).

>

> I'm concerned about how to determine what is useful for progress in

> Krishna

> consciousness.

>

> Srila Prabhupada taught us "yukta-vairagya" and expected us to use our

> intelligence to discern how we can utilize the material world in our

> efforts

> to become Krishna conscious and to give Krishna consciousness to others.

>

> At the same time, he taught us that Krishna consciousness is not dependent

> on any material support.

>

> So one challenge appears to be understanding how to "use" something

> material

> without becoming "dependent" on it.

>

> Another challenge is to be able to distinguish when something appears to

> have some utility, but is in the long run detrimental.

>

> This thread mainly deals with one kind of material support, broadly termed

> as "psychology."

>

> Within this broad term I believe we all agree that there are certainly

> some

> situations where the tools of the modern psychology profession can be

> useful, especially when someone is suffering from severe mental illness.

>

> But where we seem to disagree is on the usefulness of psychological tools

> for personal growth in the absence of any substantial mental illness (of

> course, Srila Prabhupada has pointed out that in the material world we are

> all more or less crazy, but I think you understand what I mean).

>

> Personally, I am divided on this issue.

>

> On the one hand, I do not believe we should reject a technique for

> personal

> growth and introspection simply because it comes from outside our

> tradition.

>

> For example, I have used Stephen Covey's simple list of seven habits as a

> commonsense guide for some aspects of my development in personal

> relationships.

>

> On the other hand, I share the concern that has been voiced in this

> dialogue

> about personal growth work that is largely based on the transformational

> psychology work of Werner Erhard, who pioneered this in the early 70s (a

> la

> EST).

>

> His approach is summarized as follows

> (http://www.wernererhard.com/wernererhardinfluence.htm)

>

> "Transformation, according to Erhard, creates a clear distinction between

> changing an existing model (no matter how significantly) and creating an

> entirely new model. This thinking gave rise to the idea that human beings

> could transform their lives in a very short period of time yielding

> powerful, long-lasting results. "

>

> It would seem that any technique like this if it could be used to

> transform

> our lives towards enhanced Krishna consciousness, would be welcome in the

> same spirit as we adopt other material techniques in our practice.

>

> However, the very nature of the psychological power of these techniques

> also

> makes them dangerous, especially when the practitioner is dealing with a

> varied group of individuals and thus sets aside any specific spiritual

> values or principles in favor of "empowering" the individuals to find

> their

> own "truths."

>

> One of the unfortunate qualities of the modern age is the systematic

> "dis-empowerment" of both individuals and communities in favor of fitting

> into a materialistic mold that drives a consumeristic society.

>

> In our movement we have also seen this at times, with disastrous results.

>

> Therefore, I can understand how some devotees are seeking the benefits

> that

> personal transformation techniques offer, not as a replacement for the

> practice of Krishna consciousness but as a tool to strengthen their

> ability

> to practice this process.

>

> But, to be effective, for our Krishna conscious goal, I agree that those

> offering these techniques must first of all be very well grounded in

> Krishna

> consciousness and, what is most important, offer them within the context

> of

> devotional service, rather than in some generic "empowerment" ideal.

>

> For example, I have been recently invited to a japa enhancement retreat to

> be conducted by a leading sanyassi.

>

> Now, "retreats" are a common part of the personal transformation toolkit.

> And, I doubt that Srila Prabhupada ever spoke of this as a tool for

> Krishna

> consciousness.

>

> Still, I believe that this will be a great opportunity for personal

> transformation and growth, without so much danger of Maya's influence as I

> see in those courses which are wholly focused on "personal transformation"

> without any direct reference to the practice of sadhana- bhakti.

>

> In conclusion, I agree that personal transformation work can help in our

> pursuit of Krishna consciousness, but I also agree that Krishna

> consciousness is not dependent on this work. And I agree that without a

> direct framework of Krishna consciousness, personal transformation work

> can

> sometimes harm a devotees progress.

>

> Where that puts me in this debate, I'm not sure, but there it is anyhow.

>

> Your servant,

> Pancharatna dasa

>