Did we enter the body at conception or we were already in the sperm before?

[Guruvani]

 

TRANSLATION

That which pervades the entire body you should know to be indestructible. No one is able to destroy that imperishable soul.

 

That which pervades the entire body.....

 

if consciousness pervades the entire body then what is the need of an individual soul in each cell.

 

the human soul is supplying energy to the whole body.

[Guruvani]

 

 

Prabhupada knew the medical science, and he knew cells, considering them to be independently endowed with individual souls. That is clear from his books.

 

then please provide a quote....

 

I think you cannot...

[Guruvani]

 

There is all kinds of fusion going on in the blood. Just study the subject even for 10 minutes before you venture an opinion on it.

 

Blood acts as a universal carrier of nutrients (like sugar from the digestive system and oxygen from lungs) as well as metabolical byproducts of the cellular level (like carbon dioxide and urea) to be discarded through lungs and kidneys.

 

no...

Srila Prabhupada is not talking about nutrients or oxygen he is talking about ENERGY FROM THE SOUL..... that is what we call CONSCIOUSNESS.

 

 

corpuscles which carry the oxygen from the lungs gather energy from the soul

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

I have never heard of any process of fusion in the blood, but I have heard of "binary fission" which is what the blood cells do when they divide and multiply.

To clear up your misconception, blood cells do not reproduce themselves by fission. They are produced in the bone marrow. Thus it is impossible that Prabhupada actually meant to say fission instead of fusion.

 

My understanding of Srila Prabhupada's use of "fusion" (a word he has only used once in all his recorded works and conversations) is the mixing of ingredients and subsequent release of energy. My understanding may be incomplete or wrong, but fission certainly wasn't what he meant to say, as blood does not reproduce by fission.

[Guruvani]

 

To clear up your misconception, blood cells do not reproduce themselves by fission. They are produced in the bone marrow. Thus it is impossible that Prabhupada actually meant to say fission instead of fusion.

 

My understanding of Srila Prabhupada's use of "fusion" (a word he has only used once in all his recorded works and conversations) is the mixing of ingredients and subsequent release of energy. My understanding may be incomplete or wrong, but fission certainly wasn't what he meant to say, as blood does not reproduce by fission.

 

I have been through the books of Srila Prabhupada many times.

I have seen where he refers to germs and bacteria as having the soul, but he has never said that human tissue cells all have individual souls.

 

If every individual cell in the body had a soul, then I think Srila Prabhupada would have mentioned it.

He did not.

He mentioned germs and bacteria, but never tissue cells and I don't think anyone can show that Srila Prabhupada or any shastric reference has ever said that there is a soul in each cell of the body.

 

There really is nowhere in the words of Srila Prabhupada where he says that each cell of the body has a soul.

 

If anyone can prove otherwise I will glady accept it.

 

Until then, I am going by what Krishna says that our bodies are made out of material energy of Earth, water, fire, etc.

 

There is nothing in shastra that says that our bodies are made out of jivas.

It's just not there.

[theist]

<table class="tborder" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="thead" colspan="2">

</td> </tr> <tr title="Post 1063104" valign="top"> <td class="alt1" align="center" width="125">Lowborn's quote and my response:

</td> <td class="alt1"><!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote --> Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Lowborn

And these are the same people who claim we only need books to be saved

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->Wrong!

 

Guruvani is a work unto himself. And Muralidhar doesn't hold that view if I'm not mistaken.

 

And I do hold the view that the books are sufficent to deliver one to Krsna's feet. But in practical life no one just reads the sastra and commentaries alone in a cave and I have been arguing the opposite opinion to Guruvani.

 

BTW Lowborn since you don't look to the books as your saviour but apparently to the "living guru" (embodied teacher absolutely necessary) camp would you mind sharing who your living guru is since I believe you once said you came to Krsna consciousness after Srila Prabhupada left. Sorry if I'm mistaken on that.</td> </tr> <!-- END TEMPLATE: newreply_reviewbit --> <tr> <td class="tfoot" colspan="2" align="center">

</td></tr></tbody></table>

Lowborns answer.

 

 

If it was not for the living gurus the books would have been dead for me.

 

Gurus live, and then depart. I make due with what Krsna gives me. I have more than one living person I call my guru and inquire from. But these days the answers mostly come from within, by the mercy of Sri Guru. I worship Him daily in both the mantra-vigraha and sila-vigraha aspects.

 

My response.

 

Well, the "living (embodied) guru" crowd are of the opinion that one needs some formal relationship as disciple and guru to an embodied guru for some reason they have never been able to articulate in all the years I have paid them any attention at all. Their position is left at "just because...."

 

Now at some point I believe you had established such a relationship with one of these embodied ecclesastical gurus from Iskcon who fell down. If you choose not to refresh my memory on that score then I can only go with what I belielieve I remember. If true the fact that you don't mention him to me is telling.

 

In eithe case the scenario you outlined above is not the typical embodied guru line. I don't think you should identify with them. Your position as just stated is exactly like my own and the so-called bookvadis. Actually I consider myself a vanivadi and not a bookvadi because bookvadi sounds exclusive to books. I believe in accepting vani from wherever Caitya guru sends in my way. From His embodied representative or the vani of His past representatives through advanced or general devotees, through nature in general or directly in the heart which is the rarest of experiences so far.

 

Considering this and your statement above I believe we are both vanivadis. Not ritviks, not embodied gurus-vadis and not bookvadis but rather vanivadis.

I also believe this definition of vanivadi will cover many other devotees as well and I hope the term catches on to the point where all vaisnavas will understand that vanivada is really what the parampara has always been anyway.

 

Caitya guru will reveal Himself to each of us as individuals and instruct us accordingly with one source of vani being emphasised more than another but in all cases vani is the essence.

 

I AM NOT A RITVIK. I AM NOT A RITVIK .I AM NOT A RITVIK.

 

Anyway this is a sidepoint on this thread and now back to the main topic.

[theist]

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> corpuscles which carry the oxygen from the lungs gather energy from the soul </td> </tr> </tbody></table>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->Prana is also coming from the soul but is not consciousness. There is a whole "plane of energy" as taught by western metaphysians and just in between the astral body and the physical body lies what these metaphysicans call the energy body which serves as a conduit for energy from subtler planes to energize the physical body.

 

That may or may not be true but in either case it makes no difference because you continue to ignore JNdas's remarks on the soul in the cell distributing it's influence over it's own limited field which we call the cell.

 

Thecell that is here playing the human role spreads it'sinfluence over all the cells that make up the body and the Paramatma spreads His influence over the human and it's cells as well as everywhere else throuout existence.

[Guruvani]

Here in the Bhagavad-gita, Lord Krishna says that our bodies are made of material energy.

The material energies are earth, water, fire, air, ether etc.

 

If there were jivas in every cell then our bodies would not be made out of material energy.

the material energy is the energy of maya.

 

The base element of the body is earth, then water, fire etc.

 

This is the shastric version.

 

Earth water fire air.... this is what our bodies are made of.

 

To include a jiva in every cell would violate this shastric version of what our bodies are made of.

 

earth.... to false ego.... there is no jiva anywhere in the picture in terms of the constitution of our physical bodies.

 

We are told in shastra that our bodies are made of material energy.

if there were jivas in each cell it would also be made of spiritual energy.

 

all it takes is a little common sense to figure out....

 

the body is a machine..... machines don't have millions of jivas in them.

 

machine, machine, machine.....

 

 

Bhagavad-gītā As It Is 18.61

 

īśvaraḥ sarva-bhūtānāḿ

hṛd-deśe 'rjuna tiṣṭhati

bhrāmayan sarva-bhūtāni

yantrārūḍhāni māyayā

 

SYNONYMS

īśvaraḥ — the Supreme Lord; sarva-bhūtānām — of all living entities; hṛt-deśe — in the location of the heart; arjuna — O Arjuna; tiṣṭhati — resides; bhrāmayan — causing to travel; sarva-bhūtāni — all living entities; yantra — on a machine; ārūḍhani — being placed; māyayā — under the spell of material energy.

 

 

TRANSLATION

The Supreme Lord is situated in everyone's heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy.

 

 

PURPORT

Arjuna was not the supreme knower, and his decision to fight or not to fight was confined to his limited discretion. Lord Kṛṣṇa instructed that the individual is not all in all. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, or He Himself, Kṛṣṇa, as the localized Supersoul, sits in the heart directing the living being. After changing bodies, the living entity forgets his past deeds, but the Supersoul, as the knower of the past, present and future, remains the witness of all his activities. Therefore all the activities of living entities are directed by this Supersoul. The living entity gets what he deserves and is carried by the material body, which is created in the material energy under the direction of the Supersoul. As soon as a living entity is placed in a particular type of body, he has to work under the spell of that bodily situation. A person seated in a high-speed motorcar goes faster than one seated in a slower car, though the living entities, the drivers, may be the same. Similarly, by the order of the Supreme Soul, material nature fashions a particular type of body to a particular type of living entity so that he may work according to his past desires. The living entity is not independent. One should not think himself independent of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The individual is always under the Lord's control. Therefore one's duty is to surrender, and that is the injunction of the next verse.

 

[Guruvani]

 

Considering this and your statement above I believe we are both vanivadis. Not ritviks, not embodied gurus-vadis and not bookvadis but rather vanivadis.

Well, in the vani of Srila Prabhupada he advised that anyone serious about Krishna consciousness would join the society of devotees and adopt the life of a devotee.

 

Vanivadi without following the instructions is bhogivadi.

 

Following the vani is not just a matter of reading books.

it's about following the instructions in the book.

 

If I remember correctly Srila Prabhupada advised that those who read the books to get some practical help from ISKCON.

 

You can't be a vanivadi without doing something about it.

 

Reading books alone is not what the vani of Srila Prabhupada was about.

 

So, I think you are really more of a bookvadi than a true vanivadi.

 

Vanivadis follow instructions, they just don't read books alone in their apartment for years on end.

[Guest guest]

 

no...

Srila Prabhupada is not talking about nutrients or oxygen he is talking about ENERGY FROM THE SOUL..... that is what we call CONSCIOUSNESS.

 

"The corpuscles which carry the oxygen from the lungs gather energy from the soul. When the soul passes away from this position, the activity of the blood, generating fusion, ceases."

 

these corpuscles gather energy from the soul to do their work of fusion, i.e. carrying oxygen.

 

at least this is how I read it and the key word is "fusion", that is what soul's energy is making possible.

 

one more time we can see the limitation of the book. we can't even agree what Prabhupada is saying.

[Guruvani]

 

"The corpuscles which carry the oxygen from the lungs gather energy from the soul. When the soul passes away from this position, the activity of the blood, generating fusion, ceases."

 

these corpuscles gather energy from the soul to do their work of fusion, i.e. carrying oxygen.

 

at least this is how I read it and the key word is "fusion", that is what soul's energy is making possible.

 

one more time we can see the limitation of the book. we can't even agree what Prabhupada is saying.

is that the prevailing wisdom in ISKCON nowadays?.... that there are souls in every cell of the body?

 

well, I was in ISKCON for several years and I never ever heard any such thing till Theist made the point on the forum.

 

I have been around many preachers in my day and many who had lots of direct association with Srila Prabhupada and I have never EVER heard any senior ISKCON devotee say that there is a soul in every cell.

 

I have never read anywhere that Sridhar Maharaja or Govinda Maharaja or Narayana Maharaja or any great spiritual thinker say that there is a soul in each cell of the body.

 

Frankly, Theist, Jahnava Nitai and a couple of you here on the forum are the only devotees that I have ever heard say that and I knew many senior devotees in ISKCON.

 

At this point I would accept the conclusion of Govinda Maharaja or Narayana Maharaja, but not the small-timers on this forum.

[Guest guest]

 

Considering this and your statement above I believe we are both vanivadis.

In his Bhakti-sandarbha (Anuccheda 237) Srila Jiva Goswami says:

yo mantram sa gurum saksat yo guru sa hari svayam gurur yasya bhavet tustas tasya tusto harim svayam

"The mantra (which is given by the guru during diksa ceremony) is itself the guru, and the guru is directly the Supreme Lord Hari. He with whom the spiritual master is pleased also obtains the pleasure of Sri Hari Himself.”

Jiva Gosvami actually quotes Vamana-kalpa, where Lord Brahma explains:

yo mantrah sa guruh saksad yo guruh sa harih svayam

"One should understand that the mantra one has received from the guru is identical with the guru and that the guru is identical with Lord Hari."

You need a guru from an authorized disciplic line to get the mantra. I am neither vapu- nor vani- vadi, I am a mantravadi

[Guest guest]

One who follows vani (instructions) does not necessarily need follow convention. You may think he told us all to join ISKCON, but that is not what he told me. To follow vani means to follow personal instructions, even at the exclusion of conventional (prabhupada says) ideology.

 

There is just too much revisionism, too many words and phrases that Srila Prabhupada never even used. And then, if you call someone on their revisionism, they provide quotes that have absolutely no context as to the point the try to claim prabhupada made, such as the word "rtvik" contained in his books. "Sampradaya acarya" is another, and the whole concocted idea of vani being better than vapu that has become quite popular among the revisionist. All the letters that contain this idea are to specific disciples who are missing him, and he states this to indicate that separation is a transcendental emotion. He has never taught anything that states that one does not need to approach a spiritual master, inquire from him submissivesly, serve him with rapt attention, etc. Yet the revisionist says that we dont need to do this, all we have to do is pledge allegiance to prabhupada, give ourselves a so-called spiritual name, and force our bloody karma off on who we imagine to be our guru, never allowing him a chance to determine our eligibility. The revisionist insists that srila Prabhupada has created an eccliastic religious system that baptizes in his name, when Srila Prabhupada actually decries this practice as the greatest flaw in so-called christianity.

 

As far as this topic goes, there are basic rudimentary teachingts that are thrown out the window, and then the defense is that criticism is placed on someone like Lowborn, who is a professional who actually lives in the scientific medical world. I cringed when someone alluded that she is not understanding, when she probably makes 50 grand a year because she DOES know.

 

Srila Prabhupadas teaches that localized paramatma exists in every cell. He teaches these forms are made up of countless forms. He teaches that when we breath we are consuming countless living entities, causing their death. He teaches there is NO VOID.

 

He does teach that there are forms that have little consciousness, such as amoebas, yet, these forms are actually in such a state because they are in the samsara cycle, and that they are conditioned by the adiatmic, adidaivic, and adibhautic miseries.

 

Tell me this, if a cancer cell has no life, why can such a being be the cause of adibhautic miseries felt by one who has such cells in their system. Demigods (adiatmic)? No, they are not demigods. The mind (adiatmic)? No, cancer is not a psychiatric concern. Cancer cells are other living entities (adibhautic), and they cause misery just as politicians, economists, fools, criminals, and priests.

 

But this thread is quite revealing to show how teachings of the great acarya, Srila Prabhupada, are totally twisted, speculated upon, and, most disturbingly but quite popular, revised.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

[Guruvani]

 

I am a mantravadi

 

really?

or are you like me a servant of the senses?

 

dude, let's stop the pretense.

 

we are both bhogivada.....

 

(so is Theist)

 

gotcha?????

 

If there is a true goswami in this crowd then may be please stand up...!

[Guest guest]

I dont know, therefore, no one else can know, either. Actually, there are goswamis in this realm, but they are not advertizing, because the urge to claim perfection disqualifies such perfection.

 

"I am fallen" is a statement with two meanings. One is from someone who is not, and is a statement of humility. Another is frome one who is, and is a statement of fact. Same statement, diferent meaning. One is humble, one is not.

 

Hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

BTW, I am neither fallen nor not fallen. I am insignificant.

[theist]

 

In his Bhakti-sandarbha (Anuccheda 237) Srila Jiva Goswami says:

 

yo mantram sa gurum saksat yo guru sa hari svayam gurur yasya bhavet tustas tasya tusto harim svayam

 

"The mantra (which is given by the guru during diksa ceremony) is itself the guru, and the guru is directly the Supreme Lord Hari. He with whom the spiritual master is pleased also obtains the pleasure of Sri Hari Himself.”

 

Jiva Gosvami actually quotes Vamana-kalpa, where Lord Brahma explains:

 

yo mantrah sa guruh saksad yo guruh sa harih svayam

 

"One should understand that the mantra one has received from the guru is identical with the guru and that the guru is identical with Lord Hari."

 

You need a guru from an authorized disciplic line to get the mantra. I am neither vapu- nor vani- vadi, I am a mantravadi

 

OK so who is your mantra guru? Are you ashamed of him perhaps because you later found out his connection was illusory and you were cheated which according to you would make your connection non existent.

 

But then the question is mantra (gayatri) or Holy Name which is not dependent on formal diksa?

[Guruvani]

hey, I was in ISKCON during the "Prabhupada era" and nobody was preaching that there were souls in every cell of the body.

 

Honestly, the first time I ever heard it was the other day when Theist made the point.

Honesly, I am quite surprised to hear followers of Srila Prabhupada saying that because I lived in ISKCON temples for several years and heard many lectures by all the big guns and I never ever heard any such thing like you devotees are saying here on this forum.

 

it just strikes me as strange that something as controversial as this was never properly dispatched during the time of Srila Prabhupada.

 

I have never heard any senior ISKCON devotee preaching this stuff and I was deep into ISKCON for several years.

[Guest guest]

 

really?

or are you like me a servant of the senses?

 

dude, let's stop the pretense.

 

we are both bhogivada.....

 

 

while I will not pretend I fully mastered my senses I am not a bhogavadi either. indeed, by the grace of Sri Guru, I have some attachment to shabda-brahman and the Holy Name.

 

all these guru-related wars in our society are the flipside of extreme guru-centrism promoted by the contemporary Gaudiya Vaishnavism today. it is this extreme guru-centrism that gave rise to zonal-acharyaism, ritvikism, and various quarrels within GM and GM and Iskcon.

 

I was never a tantric guru-fanatic like most Iskcon devotees. My idea of a guru was always vedic or yogic, not tantric. For me, guru is simply one way the Sri Guru, Krsna, is speaking to me. Everything else is more or less just hype and sentiment - sometimes useful, sometimes not.

[theist]

 

hey, I was in ISKCON during the "Prabhupada era" and nobody was preaching that there were souls in every cell of the body.

 

Honestly, the first time I ever heard it was the other day when Theist made the point.

Honesly, I am quite surprised to hear followers of Srila Prabhupada saying that because I lived in ISKCON temples for several years and heard many lectures by all the big guns and I never ever heard any such thing like you devotees are saying here on this forum.

 

it just strikes me as strange that something as controversial as this was never properly dispatched during the time of Srila Prabhupada.

 

I have never heard any senior ISKCON devotee preaching this stuff and I was deep into ISKCON for several years.

Prabhupada's disciples question him specifically on this point as did a guest at one of his lectures. When first brought he he admited he didn't know for sure. When asked again by a guest he said "that's all right."

 

Srila Prabhupada also has his dynamic relationship with Krsna and it is also growing. he had the honesty to say the magic words "I don't know" when appropriate because he wasn't trying to play God and pretend he Knew every little thing. Just another reason I like Srila Prabhupada. This makes me trust him more not less.

 

Just because you were "in Iskcon" doesn't mean everything was known to you. How many decades are you going to wear that "I was in Iskcon" badge as if it gives you some authority?

[Guest guest]

 

OK so who is your mantra guru? Are you ashamed of him perhaps because you later found out his connection was illusory and you were cheated which according to you would make your connection non existent.

 

But then the question is mantra (gayatri) or Holy Name which is not dependent on formal diksa?

 

when I received mantra diksa my guru was truly representing the sampradaya, thus the initiation into both the mantra and the sampradaya was proper.

 

the power of the Gayatri mantra is not dependent on the initiating guru, just like the power of the Holy Name is not dependent on harinama guru - it is only dependent on Krsna. I feel that potency every day.

 

do you really need Gayatri mantra to advance in spiritual life? I believe that the final leg of this journey upwards (higher rasas) can only be accomplished with it's aid. one day you may feel the same, my friend. there is some serious potency in that mantra

[Guest guest]

 

Tell me this, if a cancer cell has no life, why can such a being be the cause of adibhautic miseries felt by one who has such cells in their system. Demigods (adiatmic)? No, they are not demigods. The mind (adiatmic)? No, cancer is not a psychiatric concern. Cancer cells are other living entities (adibhautic), and they cause misery just as politicians, economists, fools, criminals, and priests.

 

There is more to it. A cancer is a demonic entity, whose body consists of individual cancer cells working under that entity, just like our body consists of normal cells. That is why native healers all over the world try to kill or repel the disease as a ghost. Everything is a person, even powerful storms. Demons joy-ride such bodies just like we joy-ride ours.

[Sarva gattah]

Theres 8,400,000 specis of life from the single cell to the human body, they are all vessels carrying the nitya-baddha's or jiva/soul's. Our biological bodies are made up of billions of other embodied jivas who are at different stages of their evolution that leads them eventually to their own human form that gives them the chance to again develope their original spiritual existence. Where ever there is life, then there is an individual embodied soul. In fact all dead matter originate from life.

 

In other words when biological vessels of all 8,400,000 specis gradually becomes unfit for the jiva/souls, including the most promant jiva/soul (us),those biological contaiments, that are abandoned by the jiva due to the impermance within the mahat-tattva, then become fosselized when the jiva/souls have vacated them. Then that matter becomes the gases and dust that spreads throughout the creation that eventual becomes rocks, moutains, oceans moons planets, etc. All dead matter is left over from the presents of life (the presents of the minute embodied (ethereal vessl) jiva consciousness or nitya-baddha). This is all part and parcel of the creation of Maha-Vishnu and His mahat-tattva creation

[theist]

 

TRANSLATION Bg 2.24

This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable, immovable and eternally the same.

 

PURPORT

All these qualifications of the atomic soul definitely prove that the individual soul is eternally the atomic particle of the spirit whole, and he remains the same atom eternally, without change. The theory of monism is very difficult to apply in this case, because the individual soul is never expected to become one homogeneously. After liberation from material contamination, the atomic soul may prefer to remain as a spiritual spark in the effulgent rays of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the intelligent souls enter into the spiritual planets to associate with the Personality of Godhead.

The word sarva-gata ("all-pervading") is significant because there is no doubt that living entities are all over God's creation. They live on the land, in the water, in the air, within the earth and even within fire. The belief that they are sterilized in fire is not acceptable, because it is clearly stated here that the soul cannot be burned by fire. Therefore, there is no doubt that there are living entities also in the sun planet with suitable bodies to live there. If the sun globe is uninhabited, then the word sarva-gata—"living everywhere"—becomes meaningless.

 

So the monist have a progressive meditation that goes like this. A condition soul being to meditate on spiritsoul. As a beginner still contaminated by a sense of plurality of living beings souls he at firat starts to appreciate that spirit lives everywhere and thus sees everything as having an individual soul.

 

As he advances in mayavad realization he starts to get deeper and deeper realizations of oneness. A good example is the human form as discussed. At first he thnks cells have individual souls. The he see the spiritual reality within the human form as one and negates all individuality there and thus conceives of only the human soul as existing. This meditation progresses and he amalgamates the individual human souls into the totality of humans and may personify this vision as Manu for example. Manu then is seen as the one truly human soul. Then Manu is amalgamated into all the previous Manu's which when traced back and back end up with the primal cause of Brahman as the one and only soul.

 

This type of meditation can stand as true for the impersonaliats from any number of angles. The indiviual souls with fire bodies on the sun get amalgamated into the Sun God etc. with the same result.

 

The Buddhist have a version of this neti neti style of progressive thought to arrive at their goal of voidism.

 

Lord Buddha said: "I see the stem, I see the leaves, I see the petals, but I see no lotus flower."

 

If we follow this path then it becomes I see such and such molecules but I see no stem leaf or petals. The I see the such and such atoms but I see no moleculars. the quarks and reducing as far as one's knowledge will take one until finally one accepts that all that appears to exist really has no existence and one accepts that the only truth is void which is not reducable.

 

Vaisnavas must be on guard and extremely vigilant to not let this insidious pollutive type of thinking dismantle their own siddhanta.

[theist]

 

when I received mantra diksa my guru was truly representing the sampradaya, thus the initiation into both the mantra and the sampradaya was proper.

 

Maybe maybe not. I doubt you knew for sure but I am sure you thought you did.

 

 

the power of the Gayatri mantra is not dependent on the initiating guru, just like the power of the Holy Name is not dependent on harinama guru - it is only dependent on Krsna. I feel that potency every day.

Krsna is His Holy name therefore the power of the Holy Name rest solely on itself as Krsna.

 

 

do you really need Gayatri mantra to advance in spiritual life? I believe that the final leg of this journey upwards (higher rasas) can only be accomplished with it's aid. one day you may feel the same, my friend. there is some serious potency in that mantra

I believe the Holy Name is not dependent on the gayatri mantra for delivering the soul to any level of realization. It is after the Holy name which potentiates the gayatri mantra not the other way around.

 

Sounds to me like you are trying to straddle two positions at once. Like having one leg in one boat and another in a different boat. At some point you will see they tend to drift apart and you will have to pull one leg back into one of the boats to join the other. But that is your business. I only mention it because you seem to think you are in some superior position because you once enetered into a ceremony with a now fallen ecclesastical guru and consider yourself somehow saved by that. Much like the christians who undergo water baptism and now think they are secure.

 

Feel free to take the last word on this for this thread as I feel I may have redirected it too much already. if I answer I will do so on a new thread.

[Guest guest]

 

Maybe maybe not. I doubt you knew for sure but I am sure you thought you did.

 

this is something that can be said about a lot of things, such as initiations conducted