Is ISKCON philosophy outdated?

[Guruvani]

In the preaching, letters and even the books of Srila Prabhupada we find a very unique style of commentary and preaching that is unique even compared to any of the predecessor acharyas.

 

For example, Srila Prabhupada introduced the theme "back to Godhead" which promotes a kind of idea that we have fallen down from Goloka and become conditioned souls.

 

But, in the books of Srila Prabhupada we read that liberated souls are perfect and not subject to illusion or falldown. We read that no one falls down from Vaikuntha and that the liberated souls in Vaikuntha are infallible.

 

Still, despite shastric statements about the infallibility of liberated souls and the perfection of the nitya siddhas we see a relentless refrain in the preaching of Srila Prabhupada about "back to Godhead".

 

My question on this topic is if maybe the style of preaching that Srila Prabhupada used to spread KC all over the world might eventually become outdated as Vaishnavas all over the world study the shastra and start to see through the "BACK TO GODHEAD" fairytale?

 

Or, did Srila Prabhupada just contradict himself and shastra so many times?

Was he confused about exactly how to preach to westerners and stepped outside the siddhanta as a sort of backdoor entrance into western culture?

 

The Bhaktivedanta purports are quite replete with apparent deviations from shastric conclusions. I understand it was part of Srila Prabhupada's preaching strategy. Maybe he underestimated the ability of western people to learn Sanksrit and Bengali and read the original texts and eventually find discrepancies in his translations?

 

Some ISKCON type fanatics think Srila Prabhupada is an authority unto himself and knows more than shastra and does not have to present the shastric conclusions as they are.

 

In time there has become a growing divide between English speaking devotees who don't know Sanksrit or Bengali and those western devotees who have learned.

 

It is creating growing divide that can only grow and grow in time.

 

Is ISKCON destined to become a small cult of fanatics as the greater world society of Vaishnavas gravitate towards a more literal meaning of the shastra without the Bhaktivedanta purports and the elaborate commentaries that have some sort of psychology built in that appears to cater to a certain conception of how Srila Prabhupada thought that Krishna consciousness should be understood in the western world?

 

Any devotee who learns Sanskrit or Bengali is going to find a particular unique bent on the translations that don't always stay to the literal meaning and reflects the taking of a lot of liberties in the explanation.

 

The result is that there is a growing clash between the literalists and Bhaktivedanta puports.

 

It doesn't appear that the global Vaishnava community has any hope of ever being a unified and united movement with one central doctrine that is universally accepated.

 

In fact the Bhaktivedanta purports have created an irreconcilable chasm between ISKCON and the Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON and the independent scholars of the Gaudiya canon.

 

I personally don't see how this massive rift can ever be bridged.

I guess Srila Prabhupada never wanted it to.

 

Did the Bhaktivedanta purport approach have a sort of "this philosophy will self-destruct in 50 years" mechanism built into it?

 

I just don't see how the Bhaktivedanta purports are going to be able to weather the next century without being pushed into the museum of Hare Krishna history.

 

Even ISKCON, maybe I should say especially ISKCON is also moving away from the Bhaktivedanta purport law and relegating it to the backseat of ISKCON authority.

 

ISKCON has in many ways moved on from the Bhakitvedanta Swami era and made ISKCON the property of the GBC.

 

I am personally getting to the point to where I am finding it increasingly harder and harder to keep up the rather daunting task of escavating the truth in Srila Prabhupada's books and seperate it from the Bhaktivedanta fairytales he told his ISKCON children.

 

In some ways I resent that I even am required to dig so deep in to the books of Srila Prabhupada to find the truth beyond the fairytales.

[Kulapavana]

This is very deep stuff, Guruvani prabhu. Lots of very, very keen insight in what you wrote. I'm impressed with both the thoughts and your courage to express them here. Dandavat pranams.

[theist]

Arguing and stressing over Crow and Tal Fruit logic will always bring frustration and never resolution. That is why Srila Prabhupada said to abandon it.

[theist]

 

I am personally getting to the point to where I am finding it increasingly harder and harder to keep up the rather daunting task of escavating the truth in Srila Prabhupada's books and seperate it from the Bhaktivedanta fairytales he told his ISKCON children.

 

In some ways I resent that I even am required to dig so deep in to the books of Srila Prabhupada to find the truth beyond the fairytales.

 

 

 

Srila Prabhupada clearly said in that letter to Krsnadasa 1972 that I have posted a thousand times, not to be concerned with the seeming contradictions between the Bhagavatam and the material scientists but rather to "Take the essence..."

 

This is also the case in these stupid origin debates. When you understand that some things are unresolvable from our present platform or not even worthy of trying to resolve then you can approach the Srimad Bhagavatam and the Bhaktivedanta purports in a fresh way, with a freed mind. When you do this you will see that you don't have to dig at all to find the truth because it is lying on the surface just waiting to be picked up.

[Kulapavana]

 

My question on this topic is if maybe the style of preaching that Srila Prabhupada used to spread KC all over the might might eventually become outdated as Vaishnavas all over the world study the shastra and start to see through the "BACK TO GODHEAD" fairytale?

 

Or, did Srila Prabhupada just contradict himself and shastra so many times?

Was he confused about exactly how to preach to westerners and stepped outside the siddhanta as a sort of backdoor entrance into western culture?

 

The Bhaktivedanta purports are quite replete with apparent deviations from shastric conclusions. I understand it was part of Srila Prabhupada's preaching strategy. Maybe he underestimated the ability of western people to learn Sanksrit and Bengali and read the original texts and eventually find discrepancies in his translations?

 

Regardless of what the reasons for this situation might be, the GV siddhanta is nowadays quite well understood and easily available to all interested parties.

 

Taking liberties with the shastric siddhanta for the sake of preaching is not Srila Prabhupada's invention. This approach may offer some short term benefits but in the long term it inevitably leads to confusion.

 

I can only share with you my approach to these problems: I deeply respect everything what Srila Prabhupada wrote but I do not automatically assume it is correct in every sense. I am not willing to bend the facts just to make sure they agree with what Srila Prabhupada said. Prabhupada does not have to be right every time. He just has to be right on the really important stuff - and he is.

[Guruvani]

 

Arguing and stressing over Crow and Tal Fruit logic will always bring frustration and never resolution. That is why Srila Prabhupada said to abandon it.

But, I don't see it so much as a personal issue that we as individuals have to grapple with as much as it is an international conflict between the ISKCON doctrine and the Gaudiya Matha and all it's offshoots like Narayana Maharaja, Sridhar Maharaja's camp and the independent scholars who are eventually going to become quite qualified and adept at consulting the original Sanskrit and Bengali canon.

 

Is a global divide amongst the Gaudiyas really a healthy condition for the Gaudiya society to be in?

 

Personally, I can resolve the apparent contradictions and the other-worldly Bhagavat cosmology.

 

But, the movement as a whole is facing global philosophical conflict.

 

I personally regret that.

 

I wish the Gaudiyas could agree on a standard doctrine and therefore unify as a major religious superpower but I don't think it will happen as long as the KC movement is a house divided.

[Guruvani]

 

 

Taking liberties with the shastric siddhanta for the sake of preaching is not Srila Prabhupada's invention. This approach may offer some short term benefits but in the long term it inevitably leads to confusion.

 

 

 

My sentiments exactly which I very much regret is happening.

 

There are many ISKCON devotees confused about the Gaudiya siddhanta.

It is largely due to the way Srila Prabhupada was preaching.

 

Did Srila Prabhupada possibly underestimate how the Gaudiya culture would eventually overtake ISKCON due to the elementary approach to preaching?

 

The KC movement will eventually understand the actual shastric siddhanta and many devotees will be confused about whether Srila Prabhupada was just wrong or was it a pablum approach to preaching that was justified and necessary for that time and circumstance.

 

The fall-from-goloka fairytale is gonna dog the KC movement for a long time.

 

Would it have possibly been better if Srila Prabhupada just laid out the hard facts without trying to nurture his movement with sub-siddhanta preaching?

 

I don't like to second guess Srila Prabhupada's judgement, but the present condition of the global Gaudiya society is much divided by doctrinal differences.

 

I guess he figured that the neophyte western people needed to hear that fall-from-goloka fairytale, but eventually the KC movement is gonna grow beyond the need for such concepts as they thirst for the raw and unadulterated shastric siddhanta.

[suchandra]

 

But, I don't see it so much as a personal issue that we as individuals have to grapple with as much as it is an international conflict between the ISKCON doctrine and the Gaudiya Matha and all it's offshoots like Narayana Maharaja, Sridhar Maharaja's camp and the independent scholars who are eventually going to become quite qualified and adept at consulting the original Sanskrit and Bengali canon.

 

Is a global divide amongst the Gaudiyas really a healthy condition for the Gaudiya society to be in?

 

Personally, I can resolve the apparent contradictions and the other-worldly Bhagavat cosmology.

 

But, the movement as a whole is facing global philosophical conflict.

 

I personally regret that.

 

I wish the Gaudiyas could agree on a standard doctrine and therefore unify as a major religious superpower but I don't think will happen as long as the KC movement is a house divided.

But isnt the whole concept of Vaishnavism more or less the doctrine of following the beloved servants of Krishna? That even all those illiterate Vaishnavas who couldnt read and write but kept in their hearts to obediently follow the great devotees, that they were blessed with Krishna's mercy in full? And thus revealed such strong spiritual rasa and transcendental ecstasy that made people to surrender to Vaishnavism on the spot? To become a scholar of Vaishnava literature might be worthwhile but is it really the ultimate spiritual discipline to attain Krishna's mercy and become situated in pure devotional service?

One thing should be clear, Krishna doesnt want to be enjoyed - He never agrees to this, He wants His devotees to make Him enjoy. This is the goal of bhakti. I mean to say, how can you keep Prabhupada in the center and make him pleased with such kind of logic?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Maybe the real question isn't the stated one. Maybe the question to ask is: Is ISKCON philosophy *static* or is it *dynamic*?

 

If the conception does not continue to grow and evolve, won't it just stagnate and die?

[Kulapavana]

 

There are many ISKCON devotees confused about the Gaudiya siddhanta.

It is largely due to the way Srila Prabhupada was preaching.

 

Did Srila Prabhupada possibly underestimate how the Gaudiya culture would eventually overtake ISKCON due to the elementary approach to preaching?

 

The KC movement will eventually understand the actual shastric siddhanta and many devotees will be confused about whether Srila Prabhupada was just wrong or was it a pablum approach to preaching that was justified and necessary for that time and circumstance.

 

The fall-from-goloka fairytale is gonna dog the KC movement for a long time.

 

Would it have possibly been better if Srila Prabhupada just laid out the hard facts without trying to nurture his movement with sub-siddhanta preaching?

 

 

I think it all depends on whether we will continue to insist that Prabhupada was always right. The new generation of devotees I mostly associate with does not see Prabhupada in that way, yet they still respect and worship him as one of the greatest Vaishnava acharyas ever to grace this world. For them the issue of fall from Goloka is no big deal: most see it in the traditional GV way and others prefer Prabhupada's. The same with all other controversies.

[suchandra]

 

Maybe the real question isn't the stated one. Maybe the question to ask is: Is ISKCON philosophy *static* or is it *dynamic*?

 

If the conception does not continue to grow and evolve, won't it just stagnate and die?

"Die" means to stop to follow, there's no other meaning.

 

9 September, 1972 Dallas

 

My Dear Krsna das,

 

Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter from Fresno dated September 6, 1972, and I have noted the contents carefully.

 

You may know it that I am eternally your guide, but if you don't accept me as your guide what can I do? Unfortunately, if my disciples do not take my guidance, what can I do? By bad association it so happens, so I remain silent. I see the pricks of maya.

 

When you went to Europe last time, I was hopeful that you would organize in Sweden. You have got the capacity to do that, you are one of my old disciples and you have proven your abilities to organize things very nicely. You went to Germany and organized very nicely. I know you have got that capacity.

 

Why you have come back? You could have organized Sweden very gorgeously. You are very intelligent and also your wife is intelligent. Formally you were alone, now you are assisted by your good wife. Husband and wife equal double strength. You can do nicely anywhere.

 

You know very well how Gurudasa, Mukunda, and Syamasundara. organized the London center with great labor and hardship and now it is one of the first class temples. Syamasundara induced George Harrison to cooperate with us and he paid us nineteen-thousand dollars for Krsna Book. So there are so many works, if someone wants to work there are so many things.

 

So eternally I want to remain your guide provided you want to accept me. You mentioned that your pathway has become filled with stumbling blocks, but there are no stumbling blocks, I can kick out all those stumbling blocks immediately, provided you accept my guidance. With one stroke of my kick I can kick out all stumbling blocks.

 

You are always welcome. All of your doubts will be cleared up either personally face-to-face or by correspondence with me. I am gong to Los Angeles, you can come to live with me and all your doubts will erased. In the beginning there were no doubts, but by bad association you have now got doubts.

 

Regarding your questions you say that amongst the elder disciples there are still symptoms of greed, anger, strife, bickering, etc., but you are one of them. You are one of the old students, so you fall in that group. So the fighting is among that group, but not amongst the real workers.

 

There was fighting amongst the gopis also, so we cannot expect there will be some utopia without fighting, there is even in the spiritual sky transcendental greed, lust, envy, like that. But that is transcendental. Hamsaduta is maintaining his position of service, so why, even if a little fighting, you should go away? We should never give up our duty.

 

My godbrothers always discouraged me but I did not give up, I am doing my duty and always keeping my spiritual master in front. Even there is some difficulty or hardship, or even my godbrothers may not cooperate or there may be fighting, still, I must perform my duty to my spiritual master and not become discouraged and go away, that is my weakness.

 

As for the second question I do not know what you mean by this statement, but we accept Jesus Christ as a very good son of God. So far His preaching is concerned, that was with reference to the people amongst whom He preached. Just like "Thou shalt not kill." That means they were accustomed to killing. So you can just imagine what class of men they were.

 

It is simply a difference of mode of teaching, that is all. But we accept Him as the son of God, and He talked about God consciousness. That much we accept. So far the audience is concerned, it is a proof they are not very elevated, otherwise how they could kill Jesus Christ? That means they are not very enlightened.

 

[...]

 

Hoping this meets you in good health.

 

Your ever well-wisher,

A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

 

ACB/sda

[theist]

Both suchandra and Kulapavanna are on track as far as I can see it. Bhakti is the point not Jnana. If ones siddhanta is so-called all in order but he has no Bhakti for Krsna what is the value of his knowledge? Conversely, as mentioned, the supremely high worship and love shown by the gopis is the considered the pinnacle rasa with Krsna. So Bhakti with little or limited jnana is infinetly more valuable than the reverse of perfect jnana and no bhakti.

 

My feeling is we spend so much time on these less than important questions because we don't really want to love Krsna but yet we have seen through the material illusion of happiness to a certain extent so we are caught in between with topics like the moon etc

 

I don't view Srila Prabhupada as an answer machine. Nor Gaudiya Vaisnavism in general either. NM group won't eat red veggies because some Purana says those veggies sprang from cow's blood. This kind of stuff just makes me roll my eyes. It is not just Iskcon beliefs on some things I question.

 

But with GV teachings are to be found the highest most sublime concepts of theism imaginable and I won't toss this oppurtunity to learn even a few of them just because of some suspect statements and silly teachings.

 

In short we get into trouble when we become too heady and start thinking we are some big scholars or philosophers or some kind of learned persons.

 

We are all losers, defeated by maya. That is a better mood to have when approaching Krsna.

[Guruvani]

 

I mean to say, how can you keep Prabhupada in the center and make him pleased with such kind of logic?

 

If the Gaudiya culture is to spread all over the world and become a religious superpower for the coming centuries then is keeping Prabhupada "in the center" going to work for devotees five generations down the line?

 

How long can Srila Prabhupada be the "center" of the Gaudiya culture when many new generations of devotees and gurus will come and go?

 

Srila Prabhupada echoed the instructions of Mahaprabhu that it is the duty of all Indian Vaishnavas to promote KC all over the world.

 

As more first class Indian Vaishnavas come into prominance in the coming generations then how is it that Srila Prabhupada can forever remain "the center"?

 

Did Srila Prabhupada come to give a personality cult or to begin Gaudiya culture in the western world?

[Pita das]

 

In the preaching, letters and even the books of Srila Prabhupada we find a very unique style of commentary and preaching that is unique even compared to any of the predecessor acharyas.

 

For example, Srila Prabhupada introduced the theme "back to Godhead" which promotes a kind of idea that we have fallen down from Goloka and become conditioned souls.

 

But, in the books of Srila Prabhupada we read that liberated souls are perfect and not subject to illusion or falldown. We read that no one falls down from Vaikuntha and that the liberated souls in Vaikuntha are infallible.

 

Still, despite shastric statements about the infallibility of liberated souls and the perfection of the nitya siddhas we see a relentless refrain in the preaching of Srila Prabhupada about "back to Godhead".

 

My question on this topic is if maybe the style of preaching that Srila Prabhupada used to spread KC all over the world might eventually become outdated as Vaishnavas all over the world study the shastra and start to see through the "BACK TO GODHEAD" fairytale?

 

Or, did Srila Prabhupada just contradict himself and shastra so many times?

Was he confused about exactly how to preach to westerners and stepped outside the siddhanta as a sort of backdoor entrance into western culture?

 

The Bhaktivedanta purports are quite replete with apparent deviations from shastric conclusions. I understand it was part of Srila Prabhupada's preaching strategy. Maybe he underestimated the ability of western people to learn Sanksrit and Bengali and read the original texts and eventually find discrepancies in his translations?

 

Some ISKCON type fanatics think Srila Prabhupada is an authority unto himself and knows more than shastra and does not have to present the shastric conclusions as they are.

 

In time there has become a growing divide between English speaking devotees who don't know Sanksrit or Bengali and those western devotees who have learned.

 

It is creating growing divide that can only grow and grow in time.

 

Is ISKCON destined to become a small cult of fanatics as the greater world society of Vaishnavas gravitate towards a more literal meaning of the shastra without the Bhaktivedanta purports and the elaborate commentaries that have some sort of psychology built in that appears to cater to a certain conception of how Srila Prabhupada thought that Krishna consciousness should be understood in the western world?

 

Any devotee who learns Sanskrit or Bengali is going to find a particular unique bent on the translations that don't always stay to the literal meaning and reflects the taking of a lot of liberties in the explanation.

 

The result is that there is a growing clash between the literalists and Bhaktivedanta puports.

 

It doesn't appear that the global Vaishnava community has any hope of ever being a unified and united movement with one central doctrine that is universally accepated.

 

In fact the Bhaktivedanta purports have created an irreconcilable chasm between ISKCON and the Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON and the independent scholars of the Gaudiya canon.

 

I personally don't see how this massive rift can ever be bridged.

I guess Srila Prabhupada never wanted it to.

 

Did the Bhaktivedanta purport approach have a sort of "this philosophy will self-destruct in 50 years" mechanism built into it?

 

I just don't see how the Bhaktivedanta purports are going to be able to weather the next century without being pushed into the museum of Hare Krishna history.

 

Even ISKCON, maybe I should say especially ISKCON is also moving away from the Bhaktivedanta purport law and relegating it to the backseat of ISKCON authority.

 

ISKCON has in many ways moved on from the Bhakitvedanta Swami era and made ISKCON the property of the GBC.

 

I am personally getting to the point to where I am finding it increasingly harder and harder to keep up the rather daunting task of escavating the truth in Srila Prabhupada's books and seperate it from the Bhaktivedanta fairytales he told his ISKCON children.

 

In some ways I resent that I even am required to dig so deep in to the books of Srila Prabhupada to find the truth beyond the fairytales.

 

 

 

As the jiva is at one point placed at the point between spiritual and material relems the "tata" Back Home Back to Godhead is not incorrect postion.

 

The jiva is the eternal servant of Krishna so Back to service is also correct as eternal has no beginning .

 

Sancrit and Bengalli Scholars do not have the power to spread Lord Chaitianya Mission so we do not care for thier intrepretations.One has to observe if they even chant japa or follow a regulative life and serve under the authority of a bonifide devottee.

Shree Ballaba Acarya approched Lord Chaitanya with his comentary of Srimad Bhagavatum saying that his translation was superior to Sridhar Swami's.

 

Lord Chaitanya did not acceapt his comentary and refused to read them.

 

It was my understanding that Back to Godhead was under the authorship Srila Bhaktisiddanta's Prabhupada's and not my Srila Prabhupada.

 

This material world is the fariy tale prabhuji and the Acarya is the way out of the quicksand of this place

Bhaktivendanta Purports will become the law books for the next 10,000 years regardless of what the GM devottees preach or how the sancrit and Bengalli scholars understand sastra.

 

ISKCON must constantly reform itself back to Srila Prabhupada or it will fade .

 

In the absent of a Mahabhagavat devottee on the planet even fire flies seem very brillant.

[AncientMariner]

 

Both suchandra and Kulapavanna are on track as far as I can see it. Bhakti is the point not Jnana. If ones siddhanta is so-called all in order but he has no Bhakti for Krsna what is the value of his knowledge? Conversely, as mentioned, the supremely high worship and love shown by the gopis is the considered the pinnacle rasa with Krsna. So Bhakti with little or limited jnana is infinetly more valuable than the reverse of perfect jnana and no bhakti.

 

My feeling is we spend so much time on these less than important questions because we don't really want to love Krsna but yet we have seen through the material illusion of happiness to a certain extent so we are caught in between with topics like the moon etc

 

I don't view Srila Prabhupada as an answer machine. Nor Gaudiya Vaisnavism in general either. NM group won't eat red veggies because some Purana says those veggies sprang from cow's blood. This kind of stuff just makes me roll my eyes. It is not just Iskcon beliefs on some things I question.

 

But with GV teachings are to be found the highest most sublime concepts of theism imaginable and I won't toss this oppurtunity to learn even a few of them just because of some suspect statements and silly teachings.

 

In short we get into trouble when we become too heady and start thinking we are some big scholars or philosophers or some kind of learned persons.

 

We are all losers, defeated by maya. That is a better mood to have when approaching Krsna.

 

 

I agree with this. Whatever floats your boat but the real heady philosophical concepts of Krsna Consciousness are not that interesting to me. I guess it is becaue my intelligence level is about at the level of a sudra or a woman but I am more impressed thinking about Lord Rsabadheva, Maharaja Bharata, and Jada Bharata. I especially like how Lord Rsabadheva and Jada Bharata traveled the world like they were deaf, dumb, idiots but were actually philosophically advanced. I get a real kick out of that. I will leave all the philosophical debates to people that enjoy that sort of thing and have the aptitude for it.

 

If anyone wants to talk about how Lord Rsabadheva traveled around like he was haunted by a ghost and then smeared himself in his own stool and urine to keep the opposing elements to his devotional service at bay then you are getting to the real essence of Krsna Consciousness in my opinion. All these endless rehashed philosophical debates just don't do it for me but like I say whatever floats your boat.

[Vigraha]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by theist

Both suchandra and Kulapavanna are on track as far as I can see it. Bhakti is the point not Jnana. If ones siddhanta is so-called all in order but he has no Bhakti for Krsna what is the value of his knowledge? Conversely, as mentioned, the supremely high worship and love shown by the gopis is the considered the pinnacle rasa with Krsna. So Bhakti with little or limited jnana is infinetly more valuable than the reverse of perfect jnana and no bhakti.

 

My feeling is we spend so much time on these less than important questions because we don't really want to love Krsna but yet we have seen through the material illusion of happiness to a certain extent so we are caught in between with topics like the moon etc

 

I don't view Srila Prabhupada as an answer machine. Nor Gaudiya Vaisnavism in general either. NM group won't eat red veggies because some Purana says those veggies sprang from cow's blood. This kind of stuff just makes me roll my eyes. It is not just Iskcon beliefs on some things I question.

 

But with GV teachings are to be found the highest most sublime concepts of theism imaginable and I won't toss this oppurtunity to learn even a few of them just because of some suspect statements and silly teachings.

 

In short we get into trouble when we become too heady and start thinking we are some big scholars or philosophers or some kind of learned persons.

 

We are all losers, defeated by maya. That is a better mood to have when approaching Krsna.

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

The shruti-veda (Upanishad) confirms that the Supreme Truth, the Personality of Godhead never reveals Himself to anyone who is proud of his academic knowledge:

 

 

 

nayam atma pravacanena labhyo

na medhasa na bahuna srutena

yam evaisa vrnute tena labhyas

tasyaisa atma vivrnute tanum svam

 

 

"The Supreme Lord is not obtained by expert explanations, by vast intelligence, or even by much hearing. He is obtained only by one whom He Himself chooses. To such a person, He manifests His own form."

 

The whole matter is explained by the Lord Himself, and one who has no approach to the Lord in His personal feature can rarely understand the purport of Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam. Without being taught by the bhagavata-devotees in the disciplic succession, it is practically impossible to understand the transcendental nature and qualities of the supreme Lord.

 

Only by faithful devotion and absorption of the mind the qualities and nature of God will become revealed. Krishna is not bluffing when He says how one can mediate about the Supreme Lord.

 

There is a instructive story in this connection, narrated by Srila Prabhupada: Narada Muni used to visit Narayana sometimes in Vaikuntha. Once when he was passing through a village, one very learned brahmana asked the great Muni, “great sage, were you are going?”

 

“I am going to visit Lord Narayana,” he replied.

 

"Oh, you are going see the Lord. Will you kindly ask Him, when I shall get my salvation?"

 

"All right. I shall ask Him."

 

Than the sage went further and later on met a cobbler. He was a very simple man who lived underneath a Banyan tree. When he saw Narada Muni, he greeted him and inquired,

 

"Will you kindly inquire from God when you meet Him next time about my salvation?"

 

“Okay, I will do it,” the sage replied, and went on his way to Vaikuntha. When he met Lord Narayana, he required from Him about this two persons – the brahmana and the cobbler: “…what is their destination?"

 

Narayana said, "Well, the cobbler, after giving up his body, he's coming here to Me at Vaikuntha."

 

"And what about that brahmana?"

 

"Oh, he has to remain in the world of samsara for many more life’s. It depends on him, I do not know when he's coming."

 

Narada, hearing this statement by the Lord, was astonished, that he had to ask Him,

 

"I saw that he is a qualified brahmana, and the other one is just a cobbler. How is that? I cannot not understand the mystery behind it. Why do You say, that the cobbler is coming back to You, after his very life time and the Brahmana not?"

 

"You will understand when they will inquire from you, ‘what Narayana, was doing when you were at His abode?' Then you just explain, that He was drawing an elephant through the eye of a needle".

 

When Narada, after the darshan of the Lord went back to the earth and came through the same village as before, first he went to the brahmana’s house. The Brahmin greeted the sage happily and inquired,

 

"Oh, Sadhu! You are already back! Have you seen the Lord?"

 

"Yes."

 

“What he told you about me?”

 

“The Lord told, that he doesn’t know Himself when you will be ready for salvation.”

 

“What?! He doesn’t know! Than what kind of God is this?! Anyway, can you tell Me what kind of engagement He did when you were there?”

 

"He was drawing an elephant through the eye of a needle,” Narada replied. doing pulling an elephant through the eye of a needle."

 

"Impossible!” the Brahmin burst out.

 

“I cannot believe you. I think you ridicule me. I have all respect for your garb as a Sadhu, but I don't believe a word what you say."

 

Then Narada could understand, “that this man had no faith in the supernatural activities and nature of the Lord. He simply reads and studies the books. That's all."

 

Head shaking, Narada left the ashram of the Brahmana and went to the cobbler. The poor man was very happy to see the sage returning from the spiritual sky. After he greeted the Muni he also asked,

 

"Oh, you have seen, what Narayana was doing?"

 

The sage also told him the same thing, as advised by the Lord:

 

"He was drawing an elephant through the eye of a needele.”

“Aja, the cobbler began to cry, my Lord is wonderful! He can do anything."

 

Narada seeing the ecstasy of the simple man inquired, "So do you believe that the Lord can push an elephant through the eye of a needle?"

 

"Oh, why not? I must believe you.

"

"Then what is your reason?"

 

"Oh, my reason? I am sitting under this banyan tree, and so many fruits are falling daily, and in each fruit there are thousands of seeds, and in each seed there is a tree. If in such a small seed there can be a big tree like that, than, is it impossible to accept that Narayana is drawing an elephant through the eye of a needle?”

 

This is called faith. But not blind faith. They have a reason. If by Krishna's process, by God's process, or nature's process, such a big tree can be put within the small seed, is it impossible for Krishna to keep all these planets floating in His energy – to enter even the smallest and must subtle elements in creation? So, we have to believe it, because we have no other explanation – we cannot proof the opposite, that it is not like that. We have to understand it in this way as the Lord and His representatives are revealing it to us. Our reasoning, our argument, our logic should go in this way.

[passionate_freak]

Sorry, I was looking for Guruvani's words to me here..but couldn't find esactly where i posted, sorry not being able to catch up.

 

well,

 

everything even the teaching of the great masters becomes outdated. This is Kaliyuga. Every Yuga has its own DHARMA. So accroding to the need of the time Masters like Krsna, Rama incarnated. THe time they lived and the time we are livning is different. Still the words of those great people got some significance to this time too. But if it is applied to measure things, then reaches us nowhere, except to some dreams and the visions of those illumined ones and the Bhakti Bhajans.

 

regards

[Yofu]

Guruvani...

 

I'm impressed, but of course I expect a fanatical backlash from the fundamentalists.

 

 

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

everything even the teaching of the great masters becomes outdated.

 

Really, transcendental knowledge is eternally fresh. It's not the teachings that become outdated, it is the world becoming further degraded (in Kali Yuga).

 

For instance, most high school students these days would have a hard time comprehending much of the writing of Thakur Bhaktivinoda or Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati. Heck, lots of them can barely make it through Dickens with their TV-addled attention spans!

 

So, it's not the message that is faulty, it is our comprehension that is faulty. Thus, the Lord, in His mercy, sends an agent to present the eternal truths in terms we can comprehend.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

In the absent of a Mahabhagavat devottee on the planet even fire flies seem very brillant.

 

If you can't find a Mahabhagavat on the planet at this moment, then perhaps you're just not looking in the right places.

[Pita das]

This was the statement of His Holiness Bhakti Vaibava Puri Maharaja as told to me by my godbrother Guru Kripa Prabhu .

[Bhakta Devarsi]

 

If the Gaudiya culture is to spread all over the world and become a religious superpower for the coming centuries then is keeping Prabhupada "in the center" going to work for devotees five generations down the line?

 

How long can Srila Prabhupada be the "center" of the Gaudiya culture when many new generations of devotees and gurus will come and go?

 

Srila Prabhupada echoed the instructions of Mahaprabhu that it is the duty of all Indian Vaishnavas to promote KC all over the world.

 

As more first class Indian Vaishnavas come into prominance in the coming generations then how is it that Srila Prabhupada can forever remain "the center"?

 

Did Srila Prabhupada come to give a personality cult or to begin Gaudiya culture in the western world?

 

Well, just consider the centripital force of the cultic tendency in a human, which is to seek some central point to deify, whether the false ego, some forefather or monarch, demigod or demon.

 

It is there in anyone. What better person to have as the center, the Pole star of a cult, than a pure devotee.

 

SB 3.13.3 VERSE: O best of the virtuous, the original king of kings [Manu] was a great devotee of the Personality of Godhead Hari, and thus it is worth hearing of his sublime character and activities. Please describe them. I am very eager to hear

 

BHAKTIVEDANTA PURPORT: Srimad-Bhägavatam is full of the transcendental topics of the Personality of Godhead and His pure devotees. In the absolute world there is no difference in quality between the Supreme Lord and His pure devotee. Therefore, hearing the topics of the Lord and hearing of the character and activities of the pure devotee have the same result, namely, the development of devotional service.

 

We infuse our culture with the blessings of the greatest Cult Icon, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, every time we speak of the character and activities of HDG A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. And doing so develops our devotional service.

 

The fact that some groups of persons are of such evolutionary moment that they would twist Iskcon into a mundane personality cult, under the guise of worship and chastity of and to Srila Prabhupada is a side issue to those who would be part of the Main Plan to spread Sankirtana Culture throughout the land with Srila Prabhupada's blessings and instruction as the guiding light.

 

He once said told a devotee you may keep my picture on your altar if you need to. But he seemed to be encouraging the disciples attention on Sri Sri Gaura Nitai and Sri Sri Radha Krsna.

 

That is glorious.

 

He gave himself in ways to benefit those who would need to make his murti and name a talisman and foundation to be "leader" of the fallen neophytes, and equally to the already somewhat green yet strongly independent brahminical or Ksyatria types who rejected institutional abuses from the start.

 

He wanted to set up standards for the brahminical types to follow, under the shelter and cooperation of Ksyatrias, and let them be the cultural center in their area representing his presentation of Mahaprabhu's cult of Sankirtana.

 

Persons who can start a cult around them of distributing the Holy names and Krsna Prasadam, who do not deviate from Guru Sadhu and Sastric conclusion in their presentation of the Science of Bhakti Yoga, should be considered to be empowered and their instruction should be considered the culture that we need to add to our fallen lifestyles.

 

Proceeding without deviating from Guru Sadhu and Sastra is the trick. Til then, nothing like learning within one's father's brahminical learning village, which is what Iskcon was supposed to be by now.

[passionate_freak]

Aha ,

 

Murli_Mohan_Das,

 

I agree you. BUT,

The whole universe is dynamic and we creatures too. So, we need theories according to our recent need. It's what impelled us to come up with too many religions. N we tried to create Gods of our favor...stupidity, proper nonsense.

 

The foremost thing is what we gonna do and how we gonna be like one of the ancient Yogis. Even a thousands of books from masters won't lead us to the knowledge though it can make you a scholar or wise. True knowledge comes with the self-realization, relating self to the divinity. N it needs the proper path to trade on. Teachings and the words even the Bhagavt Gita won't lead us to the divinity because we are not in the position to understand and relate self to that. SO we need a living Guru to guide us to the path. But the world is full of socalled gurus with wisdom only. When they are not with the divinity themselves how they gonna reach us to that realm??? No way.

I'm not against reading though. It maysometimes creat the Bhakti in us which makes our task eaiser.

So, need of the time is to find out a GUru.

 

regards

[Murali_Mohan_das]

That's a good reminder, friend!

 

Let us remember that we each have our free will (however minute) and we are part of the Cosmic Dance.

 

Also, as you say, despite any efforts on our part to approach Divinity, we can only gain entrance there by the invitation of Sri Guru.

 

 

Aha ,

 

Murli_Mohan_Das,

 

I agree you. BUT,

The whole universe is dynamic and we creatures too. So, we need theories according to our recent need. It's what impelled us to come up with too many religions. N we tried to create Gods of our favor...stupidity, proper nonsense.

 

The foremost thing is what we gonna do and how we gonna be like one of the ancient Yogis. Even a thousands of books from masters won't lead us to the knowledge though it can make you a scholar or wise. True knowledge comes with the self-realization, relating self to the divinity. N it needs the proper path to trade on. Teachings and the words even the Bhagavt Gita won't lead us to the divinity because we are not in the position to understand and relate self to that. SO we need a living Guru to guide us to the path. But the world is full of socalled gurus with wisdom only. When they are not with the divinity themselves how they gonna reach us to that realm??? No way.

I'm not against reading though. It maysometimes creat the Bhakti in us which makes our task eaiser.

So, need of the time is to find out a GUru.

 

regards

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

It is there in anyone. What better person to have as the center, the Pole star of a cult, than a pure devotee.

 

True.

 

It's also true that, for those of us who had some personal association with Srila Prabhupada and/or who observed the mood created in the movement by his presence, to see the memory of our dear friend and teacher twisted and perverted by the apparently-less-than-fully-sincere is rather painful.

 

In fact, it can be nauseating and infuriating at times.

 

Folks seem to take a lot more liberties with the memory of Srila Prabhupada than they do with any other Divine Personality in the Gaudiya Vaishnava sampradaya--even Sriman Mahaprabhu.