Lord of the Flies

[Kulapavana]

 

I often hear things such as "taking a Christian approach to Gaudiya Vaishnavism" and "trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity".<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

Years ago, I might have run from such an accusation, or tried to refute it, or beat myself up over it internally. It doesn't really trigger much in me anymore. That spell is pretty much broken.

 

nicely said...

 

this is my "pagan" approach to KC

 

[Murali_Mohan_das]

That's some fancy tilak, Kula!!

 

 

nicely said...

 

this is my "pagan" approach to KC

 

[bhaktajan]

 

Originally Posted by cbrahma . . . not interested in the gold as much as the designation. That is maya.

The logic eludes me: Be interested in the gold rather then designations; thus be above maya??

Sri Isopanisad - Introduduction:

. . . In the conditioned state, our knowledge is subjected to many deficiencies. The difference between a conditioned soul and a liberated soul is that the conditioned soul has four kinds of defects. The first defect is that he must commit mistakes. For example, . . . Mahatma Gandhi was considered to be a very great personality, but he committed many mistakes. Even at the last stage of his life, his assistant warned, “Mahatma Gandhi, don’t go to the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">New Delhi</st1:place></st1:City> meeting. I have some friends, and I have heard there is danger.” But he did not hear. He persisted in going and was killed. Even great personalities like Mahatma Gandhi, . . . make mistakes. To err is human. This is one defect of the conditioned soul. . . .

 

Originally Posted by Alex J . . . In my current state of Maya and envy I might not clearly perceive who is pure and who is not. But I have a certain idea. . . .

Sri Isopanisad 6 Purport:

. . . The kanistha-adhikari is in the lowest stage of realization. He goes to a place of worship, such as a temple, church or mosque, according to his religious faith, and worships there according to scriptural injunctions. Devotees in this stage consider the Lord to be present at the place of worship and nowhere else. They cannot ascertain who is in what position in devotional service, nor can they tell who has realized the Supreme Lord. Such devotees follow the routine formulas and sometimes quarrel among themselves, considering one type of devotion better than another. These kanistha-adhikaris are actually materialistic devotees who are simply trying to transcend the material boundary to reach the spiritual plane. . . .

If you want enlightenment et al, you must get the mercy [benefactor's blessing] from an advanced devotee.

Sri Isopanisad 8 Purport:

. . . A living being desires something, and the Lord supplies the object of that desire in proportion to one’s qualification. If a man wants to be a high-court judge, he must acquire not only the necessary qualifications but also the consent of the authority who can award the title of high-court judge. The qualifications in themselves are insufficient for one to occupy the post: it must be awarded by some superior authority. Similarly, the Lord awards enjoyment to living entities in proportion to their qualifications, but good qualifications in themselves are not sufficient to enable one to receive awards. The mercy of the Lord is also required. . . .

Ys,

Bhaktajan

PS: Keep chanting your Hare Krsna Maha Mantra rounds and all this [busy busy mental] stuff will go away.

[cbrahma]

 

True enough.

 

But there's certainly a difference between 14k and 24k gold (what to speak of gold-plated tin), isn't there? It's all about the impurities (though I'd rather focus on the purities than the impurities) when it comes time to ascertain the gold's value--that's just good business sense.

Tin plated gold isn't exactly gold. This is semantics not business.

Gold on the element table is defined as

 

Name: Gold

Symbol: Au

Atomic Number: 79

Atomic Mass: 196.96655 amu

Melting Point: 1064.43 °C (1337.5801 K, 1947.9741 °F)

Boiling Point: 2807.0 °C (3080.15 K, 5084.6 °F)

Number of Protons/Electrons: 79

Number of Neutrons: 118

 

There is no mention of locality. This is the analogy Prabhupada himself used to invalidate sectarianism.

[cbrahma]

 

The logic eludes me: Be interested in the gold rather then designations; thus be above maya??

Bhaktajan

PS: Keep chanting your Hare Krsna Maha Mantra rounds and all this [busy busy mental] stuff will go away.

It doesn't surprise me you don't get the analogy. Being taken up by false designations is exactly what the materialist does (mental).

 

I'm using the same analogy Prabhupada used, you unbelievably biased sectarian. (I'm trying to be kind).

 

 

Therefore Krsna says sarva-dharman parityajya. When Krsna came, He did not come to reestablish Hindu religion or Christian religion or Muslim religion. No. Religion is religion. Gold is gold. You cannot say "Hindu gold,Muslim gold,Christian gold." That is not possible. That is not possible. That is called kaitava-dharma, cheating dharma. Gold is gold, pure gold. Therefore Bhagavata says, dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam: "Dharma means the order or the law given by God." That is dharma. This is the simple explanation of dharma. --

Sri Krishna Balaram Mandir Grand Opening Address

[Beggar]

 

...If I’m sincere, I feel that Krsna and Srila Prabhupada will help me to more clearly perceive whose sangha I want to seek out.

Who would disagree with this?

[Alex J]

 

PS: Keep chanting your Hare Krsna Maha Mantra rounds and all this [busy busy mental] stuff will go away.

Dear Bhaktajan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your post. What busy busy mental stuff are you referring to?

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[Alex J]

 

Gold is still gold no matter where you find it. If somebody is making a distinction between Indian gold over American gold they are not interested in the gold as much as the designation. That is maya.

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Can you please tell me more? I assume that what you've shared above is in connection with a post in this thread. I'm not sure that I'm correctly grasping which element of the discussion the above is in reference to. Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[cbrahma]

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Can you please tell me more? I assume that what you've shared above is in connection with a post in this thread. I'm not sure that I'm correctly grasping which element of the discussion the above is in reference to. Thank you.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

I am referring to analogy Prabhupada used when speaking about sectarianism. He understood religion to be essentially what it is without any sectarian designation - such as 'Hindu gold' , 'Christian gold', 'Muslim gold'.

[bhaktajan]

 

Originally Posted by cbrahma It doesn't surprise me you don't get the analogy. Being taken up by false designations is exactly what the materialist does (mental).

 

 

SB 1.17.39 The personality of Kali asked for something more, and because of his begging, the King gave him permission to live where there is gold because wherever there is gold there is also falsity, intoxication, lust, envy and enmity.

PURPORT

Although Maharaja Pariksit gave Kali permission to live in four places, it was very difficult for him to find the places because during the reign of Maharaja Pariksit there were no such places. Therefore Kali asked the King to give him something practical which could be utilized for his nefarious purposes. Maharaja Pariksit thus gave him permission to live in a place where there is gold, because wherever there is gold there are all the above-mentioned four things, and over and above them there is enmity also. So the personality of Kali became gold-standardized. According to Srimad-Bhagavatam, gold encourages falsity, intoxication, prostitution, envy and enmity. . . .

 

ys,

Bhaktajan

 

PS: Thank you for the clarification: you cannot believe how biased a sectarian patriot I am, Jai Iskcon!

 

 

Dear Bhaktajan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your post. What busy busy mental stuff are you referring to?

 

Sincerely,

Alex

 

With all due respect I find your writtings too sentimentally dreamy [aka wishy-washy].

 

Devotee = " . . . The qualifications in themselves are insufficient for one to occupy the post: it must be awarded by some superior authority."

 

ys,

bhaktajan

[Alex J]

 

I am referring to analogy Prabhupada used when speaking about sectarianism. He understood religion to be essentially what it is without any sectarian designation - such as 'Hindu gold' , 'Christian gold', 'Muslim gold'.

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. I think I understand more clearly now what you're communicating. I'm not sure if it was clear enough in my post #47, but when I wrote "That spell is pretty much broken" I wasn't referring to "The spell of Christianity" being broken. I can see how it might have appeared that way. It might have appeared that I was saying that I was once under the "spell" of Christianity, and that now I was free from that "spell". And that might have seemed like an insulting of Christianity.

I was talking about the "spell" of feeling a need to justify my experience, a need to somehow "prove" that my valid experience wasn't just some "Christian baggage", which was causing a skew in my perception. When I hear someone say "you're trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity" it's pretty much just words to me now, the emotional charge behind the words is significantly reduced.

I was raised a lukewarm Catholic by a father into yoga and Buddhism, and a mother into Sartre. I went to a Catholic school and liked it better than the public school I went to after. Christianity is one of the vehicles through which spritual ideas first came into my life. I'm not ashamed of Christianity, nor do I think of it all that often. My expriences with it, in my own life, were generally positive. I don't have a bone to pick with it.

I find that sometimes when the topic of guru-tattva is discussed, some people may tend to claim the moral high ground, and from that "high ground", direct what feels to me like moralistic aggression, towards another person. A topic is being discussed, and then suddenly the tables are turned. The topic is no longer guru-tattva, or whatever, the topic has now become the other person. The other person is directly or indirectly "insincere", they are "envious", they are "trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity", or whatever.

This often feels to me primarily like a block to communication, a changing of the subject. It's almost like you are now supposed to defend yourself.

"No, I'm not puffed up and envious. I swear! I'll show you how humble I am. Just watch me grovel."

"No, I'm not trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity! Please believe me. Here, I'll prove it to you!"

It feels like a waste of time.

There was a time when I took the bait, and like one of Pavlov's dogs, I reacted reflexively. For various reasons that spell is in many ways broken.

Sincerely,

Alex

[Alex J]

 

With all due respect I find your writtings too sentimentally dreamy [aka wishy-washy].

 

Devotee = " . . . The qualifications in themselves are insufficient for one to occupy the post: it must be awarded by some superior authority."

 

ys,

bhaktajan

Dear Bhaktajan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. The occupation of which post are you referring to, in this context?

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[Beggar]

 

I find that sometimes when the topic of guru-tattva is discussed, some people may tend to claim the moral high ground, and from that "high ground", direct what feels to me like moralistic aggression, towards another person. A topic is being discussed, and then suddenly the tables are turned. The topic is no longer guru-tattva, or whatever, the topic has now become the other person. The other person is directly or indirectly "insincere", they are "envious", they are "trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity", or whatever.

This often feels to me primarily like a block to communication, a changing of the subject. It's almost like you are now supposed to defend yourself...

Excellent analysis, that's very clear. Sometimes though there really are issues, but you are picking up on a "toxic" process that takes place on this forum.

[bhaktajan]

 

Originally Posted by Alex J

There's a quote often attributed to Mark Twain, which goes something like: "What gets us into trouble is not what we don't know. It's what we know for sure that just ain't so". It's sometimes also quoted as: "There is something worse than ignorance, and that's knowing what ain't so." When we "know" things that just ain't so, we no longer question them.

False facts, incorrect assumptions, can become a foundation upon which we build other things.

 

 

Dear Alex J,

 

Long before and for years since Srila Prabhupada's appearance in America spiritually oriented book could always be found that were all fluff.

Krishnamurti etc etc, "everyone is onejust love each other" --this stuff is what filled countless books meant to be read by neophytes of the first order.

What is missing is cogent points that are established by textual reference and hard won experience.

Many established devotees don't respond to any of these postings because they know how it was before the Gita "as-it-is" appeared to us.

We know what has yet to be said; and we know what is re-hashed 'speaking points' and we know when great minds speak insightful things.

Quoting populist novelists from the industrial revolution and sci-fi writers doesn't cut the muster for me.

It's like my dear Satavarupa Goswami's poetry writings--I have no time to delve into such mental wanderings.

English literature classes are full of fiction writers who would only dream of doing what Rod Sterling did: write "The Twilight Zone" all on his own.

Such expert writtings is to be commended. But 'expertise' is what we should be after--it's one of the "26 Qualities of a Devotee", not just a hack.

 

ys,

Bhaktajan

[Murali_Mohan_das]

And the purest gold one can buy is billed as 99.999% pure, isn't it?

 

Of course, let us not forget "Fool's Gold", which shines like gold, but which actually contains no gold at all, but is Iron Pyrite.

 

As my uncle used to tell me, "you don't know s**t from shinola". That's why I depend upon Sri Guru.

 

 

Tin plated gold isn't exactly gold. This is semantics not business.

Gold on the element table is defined as

 

Name: Gold

Symbol: Au

Atomic Number: 79

Atomic Mass: 196.96655 amu

Melting Point: 1064.43 °C (1337.5801 K, 1947.9741 °F)

Boiling Point: 2807.0 °C (3080.15 K, 5084.6 °F)

Number of Protons/Electrons: 79

Number of Neutrons: 118

 

There is no mention of locality. This is the analogy Prabhupada himself used to invalidate sectarianism.

[cbrahma]

 

And the purest gold one can buy is billed as 99.999% pure, isn't it?

 

Of course, let us not forget "Fool's Gold", which shines like gold, but which actually contains no gold at all, but is Iron Pyrite.

 

As my uncle used to tell me, "you don't know s**t from shinola". That's why I depend upon Sri Guru.

Yes I'm well acquainted with all the permutations and simulations of gold - but gold is still gold whether you like it or not.

[cbrahma]

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. I think I understand more clearly now what you're communicating. I'm not sure if it was clear enough in my post #47, but when I wrote "That spell is pretty much broken" I wasn't referring to "The spell of Christianity" being broken. I can see how it might have appeared that way. It might have appeared that I was saying that I was once under the "spell" of Christianity, and that now I was free from that "spell". And that might have seemed like an insulting of Christianity.

I was talking about the "spell" of feeling a need to justify my experience, a need to somehow "prove" that my valid experience wasn't just some "Christian baggage", which was causing a skew in my perception. When I hear someone say "you're trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity" it's pretty much just words to me now, the emotional charge behind the words is significantly reduced.

I was raised a lukewarm Catholic by a father into yoga and Buddhism, and a mother into Sartre. I went to a Catholic school and liked it better than the public school I went to after. Christianity is one of the vehicles through which spritual ideas first came into my life. I'm not ashamed of Christianity, nor do I think of it all that often. My expriences with it, in my own life, were generally positive. I don't have a bone to pick with it.

I find that sometimes when the topic of guru-tattva is discussed, some people may tend to claim the moral high ground, and from that "high ground", direct what feels to me like moralistic aggression, towards another person. A topic is being discussed, and then suddenly the tables are turned. The topic is no longer guru-tattva, or whatever, the topic has now become the other person. The other person is directly or indirectly "insincere", they are "envious", they are "trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity", or whatever.

This often feels to me primarily like a block to communication, a changing of the subject. It's almost like you are now supposed to defend yourself.

"No, I'm not puffed up and envious. I swear! I'll show you how humble I am. Just watch me grovel."

"No, I'm not trying to turn Krsna Consciousness into Christianity! Please believe me. Here, I'll prove it to you!"

It feels like a waste of time.

There was a time when I took the bait, and like one of Pavlov's dogs, I reacted reflexively. For various reasons that spell is in many ways broken.

Sincerely,

Alex

One can be sectarian from any religious standpoint, Muslim , Hindu Christian etc...

What is called Vaisnavism ends up identified with an institution or society with strict boundaries and authority figures that exclude others.

Exclusivity is a particularily Western tendency and is manifested in its modes of thinking informed by Hellenistic categories, Aristotelean logic and Platonic idealism.

The strong either OR.

Authentic vaisnavism , sanatana dharma, is a little too rich , too generous for most materialistic Westerners.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Yes I'm well acquainted with all the permutations and simulations of gold - but gold is still gold whether you like it or not.

 

I like Srila Prabhupada's analogy just fine. It is an excellent analogy.

 

I'm simply taking the liberty of extending the analogy to include the factor of discernment. Who knows what gold is pure and which is impure? After all, anybody can stamp 18k gold with a stamp that say "24k". It takes a true expert to discern what is truly pure.

 

It's funny, you're usually the one railing on the GBC stamping 18k (or 14k) gurus as 24k. Ha ha ha!!

[Alex J]

 

One can be sectarian from any religious standpoint, Muslim , Hindu Christian etc...

What is called Vaisnavism ends up identified with an institution or society with strict boundaries and authority figures that exclude others.

Exclusivity is a particularily Western tendency and is manifested in its modes of thinking informed by Hellenistic categories, Aristotelean logic and Platonic idealism.

The strong either OR.

Authentic vaisnavism , sanatana dharma, is a little too rich , too generous for most materialistic Westerners.

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. How did the topic of sectarianism enter into the dialogue? I notice that it's here, and I read the posts with interest, but I'm not clear on how the topic popped up, or what triggerred it.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[cbrahma]

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. How did the topic of sectarianism enter into the dialogue? I notice that it's here, and I read the posts with interest, but I'm not clear on how the topic popped up, or what triggerred it.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

Because the topic of Christianity surfaced and compared to Vaisnavism.

It should be included in Vaisnavism so no spell needs to be 'broken'.

[Alex J]

 

Because the topic of Christianity surfaced and compared to Vaisnavism.

It should be included in Vaisnavism so no spell needs to be 'broken'.

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for responding. When I mentioned the breaking of spells, I wasn't referring to Christianity.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[Alex J]

 

Dear Alex J,

 

Long before and for years since Srila Prabhupada's appearance in America spiritually oriented book could always be found that were all fluff.

Krishnamurti etc etc, "everyone is onejust love each other" --this stuff is what filled countless books meant to be read by neophytes of the first order.

What is missing is cogent points that are established by textual reference and hard won experience.

Many established devotees don't respond to any of these postings because they know how it was before the Gita "as-it-is" appeared to us.

We know what has yet to be said; and we know what is re-hashed 'speaking points' and we know when great minds speak insightful things.

Quoting populist novelists from the industrial revolution and sci-fi writers doesn't cut the muster for me.

It's like my dear Satavarupa Goswami's poetry writings--I have no time to delve into such mental wanderings.

English literature classes are full of fiction writers who would only dream of doing what Rod Sterling did: write "The Twilight Zone" all on his own.

Such expert writtings is to be commended. But 'expertise' is what we should be after--it's one of the "26 Qualities of a Devotee", not just a hack.

 

ys,

Bhaktajan

Dear Bhaktajan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. One thing I was hoping to get across, is that it has become increasingly apparent to me, that I have viewed Srila Prabhupada's teachings through a set of filters. Some of those filters I picked up during my time of contact with the ISKCON organization.

 

Certain ideas that I thought came from Srila Prabhupada, don't appear to. This blew my mind when it first started to become clearer.

 

As far as I understand the philosophy of KC, there is objective reality, and there is subjective experience. There is subjective experience that can be distorted by Maha Maya, and there is a different sort of subjective experience that is enhanced by Yoga Maya, and that is in a sense perhaps in line with Krsna's own subjective experience.

 

For example, as far as I understand, when Mother Yasoda is covered over by Yoga Maya, so that she sees Krsna as her beloved child rather than as the sum total of Reality, then she is brought closer to Krsna by this subjective experience.

 

When a jiva is covered over by Maha Maya, for example, via some combination of rajas and tamas, then that jiva may become in a sense at least partially blocked in their relationship with Krsna, and this type of subjective experience may cover the jiva's clear perception of the relationship that is there with Krsna.

 

Not only the relationship with Krsna, by even subjective experience of something as solid and mundane as external reality, can be distorted by false assumptions.

 

One of the challenges may be that there may be various people, with different subjective experiences, and who are all convinced that they are experiencing objective reality as it is.

 

One way to get closer to experiencing reality as it is, might be to first become clear about our subjective experience. I remember hearing that Srila Prabhupada once supposedly said something like: "In order to become Krsna Conscious, first you have to become conscious." (paraphrase)

 

Sadhana, as I understand it, can help to purify perception, cleanse the mirror of the mind. It can reduce the influence of the gunas, especially the lower two, and perhaps even begin to gradually awaken some of the natural emotions of the soul, which may help to bring one's subjective experience more in line with Krsna's subjective experience, aka "objective reality".

 

A person may construct a paradigm, over time, that becomes a lens through which they view the world. As far as I understand, this may take place primarily on the level of buddhi, and one may not always be fully aware that it is taking place once it's been put in motion. Once the buddhic blueprint is in place, the mind may perhaps accept or reject on that basis.

 

We have the expression "sastra caksusa", or to see "through the eyes of scripture". So sastra can help us to construct a paradigm through which we view, or maybe even "filter" the world. Since sastra also manifest in the world, our paradigm may then also become a lens through which we then turn around and view sastra with.

 

What happens when the buddhic paradigm that we've constructed is a mixture or sastra, and ideas that might not be in line with sastra? Might this combination distort, to some degree, how we subjectively experience the world? Might it then also further distort, to some degree, how we subjectively experience sastra?

 

I had a really interesting experience with a devotee, some time back. I read something that he wrote, and I felt almost immediately triggered by it. My feeling was "He's off. He's tweaking the philosophy."

 

I asked him a few polite questions, and he politely gave me a bunch of references from Srila Prabhupada to look at. As I began going through the references, it was sort of an awakening for me. I had read many of these references before, when I had first went through those cantos of the Bhagavatam, years ago. Having all of the references together now, shone a light on what had been going on inside me, when I had read those things the first time.

 

When I first read those things, I sort of translated them inside myself. It was almost as though I read Srila Prabhupada saying "A", and then inside myself I said "Well, what he actually means here is 'B'." But of course Srila Prabhupada doesn't say "B", he says "A", but internally it was like I was censoring, or filtering his words.

 

So when I read this devotee's article, it's like I became triggered because he was plainly saying "A", whereas I had conditioned myself, that when Srila Prabhupada says "A", he really means "B".

 

When I would see "A" in this devotee's article, it's almost like I would say internally "Well, this can't be right because 'A' is against the philosophy."

 

What philosophy was it against? Well I guess it was against the philosophy that I learned during my contact with the ISKCON organization. Interesting. When, years ago, I would read Srila Prabhupada say "A", it's almost like I would say internally "Well, this can't be right because 'A' is against the philosophy. When he says 'A', he actually means 'B'." And so I would distort, via my buddhi, the information that was coming to me through my eyes, as I read the books.

 

So I think it's possible to view Srila Prabhupada's words through institutional filters, and also other filters. Such filters may in fact be distorting or changing our perception and absorption, of what appears to be there in black and white on the page.

 

You mentioned textual reference. If you'd be interested to have a look at some example, from the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, which I feel are interesting in the context of this thread, then some of those examples are posted HERE.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Thanks, Alex, for highlighting exactly why it's in our best interest to surrender at the feet of Sri Guru and to reveal our minds (and misconceptions) to him/her for clarification.

[Alex J]

 

Thanks, Alex, for highlighting exactly why it's in our best interest to surrender at the feet of Sri Guru and to reveal our minds (and misconceptions) to him/her for clarification.

 

Dear Murali Mohan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. What you've described above is what I do.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[cbrahma]

 

Dear cbrahma Prabhu,

 

Thank you for responding. When I mentioned the breaking of spells, I wasn't referring to Christianity.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

 

 

was talking about the "spell" of feeling a need to justify my experience, a need to somehow "prove" that my valid experience wasn't just some "Christian baggage