Lord of the Flies

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

You may see me differently from how I experience myself. I'm not looking to convince you. I do want to express and assert my experience and understanding. I don't want to shut up, or withdraw, simply because you see things differently from how I see them.

 

The last thing I wish to do is shut you up or drive you away. Rather, the more you write, the more dangerous and tenuous you reveal your position to be. So, please, for the edification of all, continue as the Spririt moves you.

 

 

I experience Srila Prabhupada as being present in my life. I'm interested in sharing about this experience with others. Others may or may not be interested in reading what I want to share. Still, I feel benefit from honestly sharing it on this forum.

 

I experience Srila Prabhupada as being present in my life as well, both through the lingering effects of the cookie Prasadam which I received from his hands as well as in the person of Srila Gurudev, who arguably had more of his direct association than any of Srila Prabhupada's Western (or Eastern) disciples.

 

As you feel moved to share from that which you have received by Srila Prabhupada's grace, so do I. None of us can claim to have a monopoly on the mercy of Sri Guru.

 

 

In connection with this theme of presence, there's an excerpt from an article by Dhira Govinda Prabhu, that I would like to include below. You may or may not find it interesting. You may or may not connect with it. Still, I'd like to share it at the end of this post.

 

That's an interesting quote. I cannot quarrel with what it expresses. Rather, let's put it into context.

 

Who are we in relation to Sri Vyasdev? Are we so confident in ourselves as to try to follow *his* example?

 

Param Gurudev, Srila Sridhar Maharaja, reminds us again and again that, by the Will of the Lord, *anything* is possible. Anything at all. We can rule out nothing.

 

Still, what was the example set by Sriman Mahaprabhu, the Lord appearing as His Devotee? Did even *He* follow the path of Sri Vyasdev, or did He sit humbly at the feet of His Guru and (as Mahaksa Prabhu reminds us) *dance* in transcendental ecstasy with His Guru Maharaja?

 

Are we better than Sriman Mahaprabhu to think that we can work things out for ourselves with a map in hand, or are we better advised to follow a guide who we can see (however imperfectly) with our own eyes?

 

Of course, the choice is ours. Choose wisely.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

To speak of "PL models" indicates mental speculation and a failure to fully appreciate the exhortations of Srila Saraswati Prabhupada.

 

Krishna Consciousness does not entail dry mental speculation, empiric evidence, or modeling of reality. It consists of Reality the Beautiful.

 

 

Dear Beggar Prabhu,

 

Thank you very much for reading my posts, and thank you for sharing the excerpt from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, from a 1931 issue of the Harmonist. I read the excerpt with interest. I appreciate the points that you bring up.

 

With respect to the quotes from Srila Prabhupada, relating to "presence", vapu and vani, it seems to me that in addition to addressing specific situations relating to specific people, Srila Prabhupada makes statements about general principles. Though I remain open to the possibility that these quotes from Srila Prabhupada, which I shared, might be relevant only to those people who were serving his mission before November 14^th, 1977, I wouldn't say that I'm convinced that this is the full meaning of the quotes.

 

With respect to the acaryas Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura and Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura, and how the Prominent Link model might relate to them, I'd like to share an excerpt from the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link, which I feel is interesting in relation to this topic.

 

I thank you for reading.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

 

<hr>

 

Çréla Prabhupäda is not physically present and the PL model claims that he can be the direct link to the paramparä. Would it be acceptable, then, if a devotee accepted Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura as the direct link to the paramparä?

<u1>

</u1>In the verse yasya deve parä bhaktir yathä deve tathä gurau tasyaite kathitä hy arthäù prakäçante mahätmanaù, Çré Kåñëa specifies a two-center system, with the Lord as one center and the spiritual master as the other center. The spiritual master center must be the current link to the paramparä. We maintain that Çréla Prabhupäda is the current link and suggest that he can remain in that role for the duration of his movement. As described at the end of the Scenarios section, Çréla Prabhupäda’s followers know Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura and the other personalities who constitute the paramparä primarily through Çréla Prabhupäda. Çréla Prabhupäda’s followers, however, notwithstanding when they joined his movement, are expected and encouraged to develop a primarily direct relationship with Çréla Prabhupäda. This direct relationship is naturally enhanced by the guidance and realizations provided by Çréla Prabhupäda’s followers.<u1></u1><u2></u2><o></o>

 

All members of Çréla Prabhupäda’s movement do have direct relationships with Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura, Çréla Bhaktivinoda Öhäkura, Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, and other transcendental personalities. These relationships, however, are not primarily direct, but are primarily through Srila Prabhupada. <u1></u1>

“Direct, current, and primary link to the paramparä" is defined as the Vaiñëava through whom Çré Kåñëa is giving the most direct transcendental knowledge. For many devotees, regardless of who performed the initiation ceremony, Çréla Prabhupäda fulfills the definition of direct, current and primary link. It is important for the institution to acknowledge that Çréla Prabhupäda is playing this role, and will continue to play it for many, perhaps even most, members of his movement, for the lifetime of his movement. <u1></u1>

What if someone claims "By the definition given above, the direct link for me is Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé [or Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, or Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura]"? The view of the PL model is that if someone did originally connect with the saìkértana movement through the books of Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura or Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé, then Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura or Srila Rupa Goswami would arrange to connect that person to Çréla Prabhupäda, because Çréla Prabhupäda is the current link for the present time. Still, we are open to hear and observe the experiences of others, and adjust our perspective accordingly. If someone claims to be directly connected with someone other than Çréla Prabhupäda, in the primary sense as enunciated in PL, we recognize that possibility, though we are cautious about accepting such claims.<u1></u1>

 

Çréla Prabhupäda’s organization is for those who are directly connected with the paramparä through Çréla Prabhupäda. Someone may be primarily linked to the paramparä through someone else, and that is appreciated. However, that linkage is not necessarily part of Çréla Prabhupäda’s institution. For example, if someone is in the line of the Çré-sampradäya, Çréla Prabhupäda’s followers honor that, while recognizing that it’s not in Çréla Prabhupäda’s line.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Who are we in relation to Sri Vyasdev? Are we so confident in ourselves as to try to follow *his* example?

 

I said "Sri Vyasdev" in error. It was Lord Brahma mentioned in the quote from Dhira Govinda Swami.

 

The basic point remains the same.

[cbrahma]

 

...and, what makes a Guru genuine if it is not his/her implicit faith in Sri Krishna?

 

You seem unwilling to accept that faith is the lynchpin in all of this. You seem to hanker for empiric evidence and dry reason much the same as the atheists with whom I discuss similar matters on another site.

 

What makes Guru genuine is not his/her book learning, the hoops through which he/she has jumped, or any other mundane consideration.

 

What makes Guru genuine is the unshakeability of his/her faith. To that extent, *all* of the definitions of "bona fide" apply, not just number 3.

 

 

Nectar of Instruction, Chapter 5:

 

"Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master."

 

 

Madhya 24.330 - The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse:

 

"In the Padma Purana, the characteristics of the guru, the bona fide spiritual master, have been described: The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the topmost class. The first-class devotee is the spiritual master for all kinds of people."

 

 

Madhya 24.330 The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse:

"When one has attained the topmost position of maha-bhagavata, he is to be accepted as a guru and worshiped exactly like Hari, the Personality of Godhead. Only such a person is eligible to occupy the post of a guru"".

[cbrahma]

Alex prabhu, the subtext of this discussion has become the 'living guru' argument which has been rehashed ad nauseam.

Not surprisingly those who have a physically present guru will argue that it is absolutely necessary.

There are many threads on the whole vapu vs vani controversy.

Prabhupada settled that very definitely.

 

Shrila Prabhupada's Quotes on Vani and Vapu

 

Physical presence is immaterial. Presence of the transcendental sound

received from the Spiritual Master should be the guidance of life.

That will make our spiritual life successful. If you feel very

strongly about my absence you may place my pictures on my sitting

places and this will be source of inspiration for you.

 

(SP Letter to Brahmananda and other students, 19/1/67)

 

But always remember that I am always with you. As you are always

thinking of me, I am always thinking of you also. Although physically

we are not together, we are not separated spiritually. So we should

be concerned only with this spiritual connection.

 

(SP Letter to Gaurasundara, 13/11/69)

 

So we should associate by vibration, and not by the physical

presence. That is real association.

 

(SP Lectures SB, 68/08/18)

 

There are two conceptions, the physical conception and the

vibrational conception. The physical conception is temporary. The

vibrational conception is eternal.[...] When we feel separation from

Krsna or the Spirirual Master, we should just try to remember their

words or instructions, and we will no longer feel that separation.

Such association with Krsna and the Spiritual Master should be

association by vibration not physical presence. That is real

association.

 

...this is just scratching the surface.

[Alex J]

 

Rather, the more you write, the more dangerous and tenuous you reveal your position to be. So, please, for the edification of all, continue as the Spririt moves you.

Dear Murali Mohan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. I'll be happy to continue to correspond with you via the forum. I accept that may experience what I'm writing here as being tenuous and dangerous. On the other hand, I experience the things that I'm sharing as being real. They seem like common sense to me. Additionally, it feels inspiring to allow myself to continue to describe my experience, without holding back, due to some fear of social rejection.

 

 

As you feel moved to share from that which you have received by Srila Prabhupada's grace, so do I. None of us can claim to have a monopoly on the mercy of Sri Guru.

I encourage you to continue to fully express yourself on this forum, and to continue to present your experience and understanding of Krsna Consciousness, in an open way. I'll be interested to read your thoughts, perceptions, and realizations.

 

 

Of course, the choice is ours. Choose wisely.

I would like to include something at the end of this post. It's two excerpts from the Prologue to the second edition of the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link (PL). When I first read it, I connected with the expression "a perceived culture of fear and repression". The more I allow myself to express my experience on these topics, the less fearful and bitter I feel, and the more fun and interesting life is. When I first read PL, I also thought something along the lines of "You wrote just what I’ve been thinking for many years."

 

Thank you for reading my post.

Sincerely,

Alex

<hr>

Support for PL and Apprehension to Express It

 

Typical comments that I’ve received, at places like ISKCON leadership meetings and Sunday Feast programs, from devotees serving in all capacities within Srila Prabhupada’s movement, including top-level leaders in ISKCON, include statements, delivered in hushed tones, such as "I really liked your paper, The Prominent Link. You wrote just what I’ve been thinking for many years." Concurring with the statements of Ambarisa Prabhu and Balavanta Prabhu in the Foreword and Preface, many Vaisnavas emphasize the straightforward common sense of the concepts in PL. These concepts include realization of Srila Prabhupada as the prime transcendental initiator, and the practical efficiency for spreading the movement of the practice of all members of the movement accepting Srila Prabhupada as the object of worship as the prominent and direct link to the parampara. Many devotees have expressed disappointment and sadness that these principles have been neglected and overlooked by the leadership of ISKCON.

 

Tones tend to be hushed in such conversations due to an apprehension that expression of such views is discouraged in the organization, and that such expressions would incur the disfavor of members and leaders of the institution. There is a perceived culture of fear and repression in the ISKCON organization, masked by a pretense of openness to frank discussion of issues.

 

Ostensibly ISKCON wants innovative, thoughtful members who boldly apply their intelligence, within the framework of guru, sastra and sadhu, for gaining a deeper understanding of devotional principles. In practice, as experienced by many, if one does not conform to the organizational line on issues such as those addressed in PL, then the institutional leadership, without rational discussion or genuine attempt at understanding, often condemns the dissenter and discourages members of the organization to honestly look at issues from unorthodox perspectives. The implied message is "We have already thoroughly considered these issues. So you needn’t apply your intelligence here, because we’ve thought it through for you." Such a stance is unlikely to attract and retain independently thoughtful members. There is in the organization a veneer of broad-mindedness, accompanied by an implicit assertion that views such as those espoused in Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link are not to be found amongst persons in good-standing in the organization. If someone in the organization advocates such convictions, they are then branded and condemned, and pressured to leave the institution. Once they have left, it is again safe for the leadership to declare to the members that no one in good-standing would hold such views as expressed in essays such as The Prominent Link, and anyone who thinks that way is deviant, and so you’d do better to not even consider thinking in that way.

 

Authoritarian dynamics, wherein the leadership is fearful of permitting subordinates to analyze and discern for themselves, may be somewhat prevalent in today’s religious institutions, but they are not conducive for Vaisnava society or relationships. Such reluctance to allow members to fully utilize their cognitive faculties may stem to a substantial degree from a benevolent desire to protect. The ISKCON organization may also benefit, however, from introspectively looking at other motivations for this authoritarianism, such as fear that members, upon analysis of facts from an alternative perspective, may realize that they are being, in some ways, misled.

 

We understand that this imperious leadership style is not extant throughout the organization, but it is manifest with sufficient regularity and pervasiveness that many, perhaps most, of Srila Prabhupada’s followers, both inside and outside the institution, feel alienated and stifled. Thus, for the purpose of attracting and maintaining satisfied, intelligent members, it is, we believe, imperative for ISKCON leadership, especially at the top levels, to seriously assess its mode of addressing issues and concerns. As Balavanta writes in the Preface to PL, spiritual matters in Srila Prabhupada’s society must be resolved through "open and frank discussion amongst mature devotees whose voices are not suppressed."

 

(...)

 

We understand that there are many fears, ranging from loss of important personal relationships to loss of legal battles, associated with implementation of the PL model. We contend with confidence that Srila Prabhupada’s movement possesses the strength to handle the challenges that will arise with the PL paradigm, and that the movement will undoubtedly be strengthened by accommodating and encouraging the PL model.

[Alex J]

 

To speak of "PL models" indicates mental speculation and a failure to fully appreciate the exhortations of Srila Saraswati Prabhupada.

 

Krishna Consciousness does not entail dry mental speculation, empiric evidence, or modeling of reality. It consists of Reality the Beautiful.

Dear Murali Mohan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for expressing your thoughts. I'd like to share with you an excerpt from a letter that Srila Prabhupada wrote to Chaturbhus. The letter is from January 21^st, 1972. I'm including the excerpt at the end of this post.

 

In the letter Srila Prabhupada presents a distinction, which I find interesting, between "mental speculation" and "philosophical speculation".

 

Sincerely,

Alex

 

<hr>

 

As for the difference between mental speculation and philosophical speculation, we take it that everything is known by the psychological action of the mind, so that philosophical speculation is the same as mental speculation if it is merely the random or haphazard activity of the brain to understand everything and making theories, "if's" and "maybe's." But if philosophical speculation is directed by Sastra and Guru, and if the goal of such philosophical attempts is to achieve Visnu, then that philosophical speculation is not mental speculation. It is just like this: Krishna says in Bhagavad-gita that "I am the taste of water." Philosophical speculation in the accepted sense then means to try to understand, under the direction of Sastra and Guru, just how Krishna is the taste of water. The points of Bhagavad-gita, though they are simple and complete, can be understood from unlimited angles of vision. So our philosophy is not dry, like mental speculation. The proper function of the brain or psychological activity is to understand everything through Krishna's perspective or point-of-view, and so there is no limit to that understanding because Krishna is unlimited, and even though it can be said that the devotee who knows Krishna, he knows everything (15th Chapter), still, the philosophical process never stops and the devotee continues to increase his knowledge even though he knows everything. Try to understand this point, it is a very good question.

[Beggar]

Dear Bhakta Alex, Much of the discussion seems to be the position of Srila Prabhupada within the institution. If one is living in an ISKCON temple or outside in a large ISKCON community this is especially relevant. But what of those who live outside such relationships to the institution? In other words the focus become who is the actual ecclesiastical head of the institution. In your earlier posts on this thread you stressed more of your own personal feeling of a relationship that you had developed with Srila Prabhupada by reading his books and listen to electronic recordings of his classes and bhajans etc. There is always the absolute conception and it's relative application within this world. Every endeavor here is covered with some fault. In the plane of action and reaction in which we live there is always something to be gained and lost even in the sphere of the application of Krsna Consciousness into our relative individual lives and groups. In the non-ISKCON Gaudiya Math derived groups with a "living guru" I see a lack of familiarity with the works of Srila Prabhupada and it pains me. Of course some of these groups are more aware of Prabhupada's works than others. For devotees who were not present during Srila Prabhupada's manifest lila and have taken the rtvik or "soft rtvik", Prominent Link when I view that in real life, it also pains me that people think that it really the same as when Srila Prabhupada was present. Prominent Link is certainly better than having some rock and roll star ISKCON guru who ends up falling down with his brahamacarini or brahmacari disciple. And even if he does not appear to fall, his rock and roll western ego is just obnoxiousness personified. So who wants that? Real bhaktas are amazingly humble in the most real and tangible way due to their real relationship with Radha, Krsna, Mahaprabhu and Nitai Prabhu, on whatever level you see it. The reason I keep using the words, "view" and "see" is because this is actually experiential. Personally I want to "experience" the association of a pure devotee both in the vapu and the vani. If we have that vapu experience especially in a serving mood then there will be so much separation when we are left only with the vani by physical separation. The guru is both the representative and representative of Krsna. How will we ever feel separation from Krsna if we can't feel separation from guru? How can we really feel separation from Sri guru if don't actually meet and serve that person in the vapu form? So when the devotees in a particular Math sanga will want to be with their guru as much as possible how can we fault them? But of course its obvious that they will be less concerned with our Srila Prabhupada, but what can we do?

What many don't understand is that Srila Prabhupada in some of his letters was trying assuage the pain of separation from him by his disciples. When Uddhava put forth similar teachings or arguments to the gopis, they rejected them. The gopis said something like, "we are not jnanis, we are simple village girls, so your arguments do not hold any weight with us". So the idea that guru and Krsna are everywhere held no weight with the gopis because no philosophy or siddhantic truth was strong enough to temper their separation from Krsna. Did Srila Prabhupada's "new" devotees have the background and experience in Gaudiya Vaisnavism to write back and say, "this philosophy if good but we still miss you, so much?" Do you think that this would have displeased Srila Prabhupada? But anyway like I said in an earlier post, some devotees have had relationships with Srila Prabhupada and other Vaisnavas in previous lives. But you would think that such a previous experience would drive them towards meeting a real Vaisnava in this world? But each to their own. Another point is why didn't Srila Prabhupada go around and constantly preach the glories of his guru's character and activites? And why did he travel around the world so many times to give his association? Sometimes I think that the idea of "guru" is what throws so many off. What about just the idea of Vaisnava. Do you want to meet a real Vaisnava? "Nah I'll just read about them (or their words) in books". Well okay then, if that fits your institutional concerns and saves people from ISKCON rock and roll star gurus who prey on their "disciples", I guess it's really not all that bad after all.

[Alex J]

 

Dear Bhakta Alex, Much of the discussion seems to be the position of Srila Prabhupada within the institution. If one is living in an ISKCON temple or outside in a large ISKCON community this is especially relevant. But what of those who live outside such relationships to the institution? In other words the focus become who is the actual ecclesiastical head of the institution. In your earlier posts on this thread you stressed more of your own personal feeling of a relationship that you had developed with Srila Prabhupada by reading his books and listen to electronic recordings of his classes and bhajans etc.

Dear Beggar Prabhu,

 

I thank you for your post. I appreciated reading it. When I share excerpts from the book Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link (PL), I acknowledge that there is discussion in some of the excerpts about Srila Prabhupada with respect to the ISCKON institution. In some ways, that part of the book is less relevant to my current day to day experience. I no longer self-identify as a member of the ISKCON organization, nor have I visited an ISKCON temple for quite some time.

 

When I did participate in the organization, I experienced patterns similar to those described in some sections of the book. From that perspective as well, reading PL was validating for me.

 

I don't live in an ISKCON community. I have some friends who still participate in the organization, to various degrees, and others who no longer do.

 

When I write about my experiences with the ISKCON organization, for me it's more about processing my past exprience, and learning from it, than it is about wanting to effect change within the organization. Certainly I would be happy to see positive change within the organization, and the healing of what I see as destructive patterns, but I don't think that I exert much energy in that direction.

 

I self-identify as a follower of Srila Prabhupada. If we conceive of a Hare Krsna movement that trasncends the bounderies of the ISKCON organizarion, then I guess I would say that I see myself as part of such a movement.

 

Though I strive to follow Srila Prabhupada, it's not my goal to force my perception onto others. I feel good to assert that the choice that I make is valid. And I feel good to take a stand for my exprience.

 

Other people's experience may well be different. I can listen to it, and I am open to carefully consider it. I am open to learn from it.

 

 

The reason I keep using the words, "view" and "see" is because this is actually experiential. Personally I want to "experience" the association of a pure devotee both in the vapu and the vani. If we have that vapu experience especially in a serving mood then there will be so much separation when we are left only with the vani by physical separation.

I appreciate very much your use of of the words "view" and "see". For perhaps similar reasons, I tend towards the use of the word "seems" and the the expression "it seems to me that".

 

 

What many don't understand is that Srila Prabhupada in some of his letters was trying assuage the pain of separation from him by his disciples. When Uddhava put forth similar teachings or arguments to the gopis, they rejected them. The gopis said something like, "we are not jnanis, we are simple village girls, so your arguments do not hold any weight with us". So the idea that guru and Krsna are everywhere held no weight with the gopis because no philosophy or siddhantic truth was strong enough to temper their separation from Krsna. Did Srila Prabhupada's "new" devotees have the background and experience in Gaudiya Vaisnavism to write back and say, "this philosophy if good but we still miss you, so much?" Do you think that this would have displeased Srila Prabhupada?

I thank you for sharing this. I appreciate the way in which the sense of Srila Prabhuapda's personal care for his students comes through in your words. It may well be that the assuaging of personal pain due to separation, can coexist within the same letter, and perhaps even within the same sentences, with a statement of general truths and principles about spiritual life, and about the relationship between teacher and student.

 

 

Another point is why didn't Srila Prabhupada go around and constantly preach the glories of his guru's character and activites?

Here I would like to share a four-paragraph excerpt that I appreciate from PL. I feel that it connects in some ways to the question that you bring attention to, above.

 

 

"

Inherent in assertions are axiomatic assumptions. An assumption of The Prominent Link, and it could be questioned, and this would form the basis for an interesting discussion, is that Srila Prabhupada would use the words 'direct link', 'primary link', 'prominent link', and 'current link' to describe the relationships of the Vaisnavas listed consecutively at the end of the Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is. That is, Srila Prabhupada would describe Narottama dasa Thakur as the direct, primary, current, and prominent link to the disciplic succession for Visvanatha Cakravarti, who is the direct, primary, current, and prominent link for Jagannatha dasa Babaji, etc. If someone asserts that, even though Srila Prabhupada lists those names successively in his list of the disciplic succession, he would not use terms such as "direct" and "current" to describe those relationships, then the usage of terminology in The Prominent Link is questioned. Natural issues to pursue would be the determination of who Srila Prabhupada would describe as the prominent, direct, current, and primary link to the parampara for Visvanatha Cakravarti, for Bhaktivinode Thakur, for Gaurakisore dasa Babaji, etc., if not the Vaisnava acarya listed in the BG Intro.

 

 

"

I am making the assumption that Srila Prabhupada would describe the Vaisnava listed in the preceding number of that list as the direct, current, and prominent link to the parampara for the Vaisnava listed in the following number on the list. Based on that assumption I then ask 'What is the criteria for appearing on this list?' We can understand through historical fact related to the personalities on that list that the criteria isn't the performance of a formal initiation ceremony, and it isn't even simultaneous physical existence on the same planet. So what is the criteria? The criterion, as best I can perceive, and I'm open to alternative suggestions, is that the Vaisnava in the preceding number is the main deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge to the Vaisnava in the following number. With that criterion understood as being the determinant of who is the direct and prominent link to the parampara, we can then assess Srila Prabhupada's position in relation to the members of his movement. For those members of his movement for whom he is the main deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge, Srila Prabhupada is the current and primary link to the parampara. (But Srila Prabhupada didn't perform the formal initiation ceremony for that person. But Srila Prabhupada isn't physically present on the planet Earth.) Neither of those attributes are criteria for determining who is the prominent and current link to the parampara, based on the rationale described above.

 

 

"

You asked 'Does one necessarily lead to the other?' It does, if the terminological assumptions of The Prominent Link are accepted. If they're not accepted, then one would need to present alternative terminology as to who Srila Prabhupada would describe as 'direct', 'prominent', and 'current', if not the Vaisnavas listed in the preceding numbers in the list at the end of the BG Intro. Or, one could try to refute the essay's asserted criteria for being listed in that list- namely, being the Vaisnava who gives the most direct transcendental knowledge. If there is some criteria that fit better than that one, then let's hear it and discuss it, and apply it to our current situation.

 

 

"

The Prominent Link asserts that the criteria for being on the list is to be the Vaisnava who primarily delivers direct transcendental knowledge to the initiate. A further assertion is that the members of the list, who meet this criteria, can naturally be termed the direct and current links to the parampara. For many members of his movement, including those for whom he did not perform a formal initiation ceremony, Srila Prabhupada is the primary deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge, and therefore it is right and natural to refer to him as the prominent and direct link to the parampara for those devotees. If there is an argument that being the prime deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge does not lead to being the direct link to the parampara, then I'm interested to hear that argument. What is the rationale of that argument? Even if some rationale can be conceived, what is the basis on which the argument that 'the giver of direct transcendental knowledge is the direct link to the parampara' can be refuted, such that the idea is not even given legitimacy (perhaps alongside other conceptualizations) in Srila Prabhupada's organization?

"

 

 

A take-home message for me is that Srila Prabhupada is available and qualified, to link his followers to the parampara, through divya-jnana, wether or not they are participating within the structure of the organization that bears the name "ISKCON".

And why did he travel around the world so many times to give his association?

It may well be because there is vani and vapu, and one could reasonably assume that both have value. In the quotes that I shared earlier on that topic, Srila Prabhupada seemed to me to be presenting vani as being more significant, essential, and important, but I don't think that he said that vapu was not a valid form of association. There might be all kinds of other reasons as well, for Srila Prabhupada's constant traveling.

Srila Prabhupada might even have been visiting the various centers for the purpose of providing his followers with at least some "adult supervision". That aspect of Srila Prabhupada's travelling might potentially might tie back to my original post in this thread.

 

Thank you very much for reading my post.

Sincerely,

Alex

[stonehearted]

Dear Alex,

 

Thanks for the even tone you use in your discussion. It in no way diminishes the zeal with which you express your convictions and makes it much easier to read your posts.

 

I have one comment about the excerpt you include in the previous post. In it Dhira Govinda prabhu asserts that "Srila Prabhupada would use the words 'direct link', 'primary link', 'prominent link', and 'current link'." Have you ever examined that assertion? I have, and I got no hits for any of them except for "current link," and there was only one hit for that. (There were two, but one was Pradyumna reading from the purport in the other instance is found.) Well, I did get hits for "direct link," but none was used in the way intended by PL folks.

I wonder whether this might color the way we read the excerpt you shared earlier.

[Beggar]

 

"The Prominent Link asserts that the criteria for being on the list is to be the Vaisnava who primarily delivers direct transcendental knowledge to the initiate. A further assertion is that the members of the list, who meet this criteria, can naturally be termed the direct and current links to the parampara. For many members of his movement, including those for whom he did not perform a formal initiation ceremony, Srila Prabhupada is the primary deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge, and therefore it is right and natural to refer to him as the prominent and direct link to the parampara for those devotees. If there is an argument that being the prime deliverer of direct transcendental knowledge does not lead to being the direct link to the parampara, then I'm interested to hear that argument. What is the rationale of that argument? Even if some rationale can be conceived, what is the basis on which the argument that 'the giver of direct transcendental knowledge is the direct link to the parampara' can be refuted, such that the idea is not even given legitimacy (perhaps alongside other conceptualizations) in Srila Prabhupada's organization?"

Dear Bhakta Alex, It's all in how you intepret the phase "prominent link". If the line of hare nama and diksa go on through "monitor gurus" not rtviks then the line continues. If the founder acarya of a mission is more prominent than the one or many current gurus then it is only natural that devotees will want to read his books and listen to the electronic recordings of his talks and bhajans etc. But the extended ISKCON family is very large and in the Gour Govinda Maharaja (apparently deceased) part of that family they firmly believe that their link is both Gour Govinda Maharaja and Prabhupada. Are they to be considered in some illusion? What about Satsvarupa Maharaja's disciples? After his most recent confession, extremely embarrasing confessions, if some his disciples decide to stick with him, then how could they not see that Srila Prabhupada is infinitely more prominent? I believe this may come down to a deeper issue. That issue may be whether persons born into Western conditioning can ever really become gurus and not egoistic rock star gurus. I mean come on, the record is just horrific. Then you have to wonder are we really disciples, brahmanas etc.? If we will be judged on how well we follow we will really all be in serious trouble. Mercy is our only hope, try as we may, perhaps our pathetic failings will attract some mercy our way.

 

[celina12]

 

I hear this type of response every time somebody tries to bring clarity and solution to the problem of Western vaisnavism. The messenger is attacked for the message. This is exactly what keeps ISKCON and is misleaders in business.

 

you complain about alot, but you never offer any solutions, what exacly do you want to happen?

[Vedesu]

 

[...] Personally I want to "experience" the association of a pure devotee both in the vapu and the vani. If we have that vapu experience especially in a serving mood then there will be so much separation when we are left only with the vani by physical separation. The guru is both the representative and representative of Krsna. How will we ever feel separation from Krsna if we can't feel separation from guru? How can we really feel separation from Sri guru if don't actually meet and serve that person in the vapu form? [...] What many don't understand is that Srila Prabhupada in some of his letters was trying assuage the pain of separation from him by his disciples. When Uddhava put forth similar teachings or arguments to the gopis, they rejected them. The gopis said something like, "we are not jnanis, we are simple village girls, so your arguments do not hold any weight with us". So the idea that guru and Krsna are everywhere held no weight with the gopis because no philosophy or siddhantic truth was strong enough to temper their separation from Krsna. Did Srila Prabhupada's "new" devotees have the background and experience in Gaudiya Vaisnavism to write back and say, "this philosophy if good but we still miss you, so much?" Do you think that this would have displeased Srila Prabhupada? But anyway like I said in an earlier post, some devotees have had relationships with Srila Prabhupada and other Vaisnavas in previous lives. But you would think that such a previous experience would drive them towards meeting a real Vaisnava in this world? But each to their own. Another point is why didn't Srila Prabhupada go around and constantly preach the glories of his guru's character and activites? And why did he travel around the world so many times to give his association? Sometimes I think that the idea of "guru" is what throws so many off. What about just the idea of Vaisnava. Do you want to meet a real Vaisnava? "Nah I'll just read about them (or their words) in books". Well okay then, if that fits your institutional concerns and saves people from ISKCON rock and roll star gurus who prey on their "disciples", I guess it's really not all that bad after all.

 

I just wanted acknowledge post 108 as being one of the more profound I have read in quite some time. At least as it relates to me personally. Thankyou Beggar prabhu. The entire post was excellent, and I wanted to highlight a few points that really hit home. We are told that we should cry when our Guru leaves this world. Also, that we should weep on the Disappearance Day of our Guru. Ramananda Roy told Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu that the greatest pain in this world is separation from a Vaishnava. The fact that I am not feeling this separation nor shedding tears reveals me as a pretender. My heart is like stone due to my deep-rooted material attachments. I realize you were conversing with someone else, but I wanted to let you know that your krsna-katha has not gone unappreciated.

[Beggar]

 

... but I wanted to let you know that your krsna-katha has not gone unappreciated.

Well, it's really not MY Krsna katha, I'm just paraphrasing what I've heard from my gurus and different sadhus (without realization). But I'm happy to hear that I'm not completely wasting my time.

[Shakti-Fan]

Here is a quote from '04 from another website:

 

Unfortunately ritvikism [including PL] is at once an offering of homage to the greatness of Prabhupada and a scourge. Every issue can only be solved by use of the meager 12 twelve years of his teachings in the West--it's like that story he tells of the veterinarian's assistant who treats all illnesses with a hammer blow to the throat. Think of the hours (and offenses) that have gone into churning a couple of letters and a few conversations. While it is admirable to want to follow his instructions, no matter their fragmentary or misunderstood nature, unfortunately this absorption ignores the fact that Gaudiya Vaisnavism is defined by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and the Six Goswamis. Prabhupada was a messenger--one of the greatest messengers--but he was not the message. The spiritual master is a cloud, taking water from the ocean and dropping it on the forest fire. He is not the ocean.

[cbrahma]

 

you complain about alot, but you never offer any solutions, what exacly do you want to happen?

I complain about problems that are dangerous obstacles to the mission that Prabhupada had put in place. This should be everybody's complaint.

The solution is found in Prabhupada's books.

 

Enough with the power manipulations and fake gurus. The GBC needs to be dismantled and sincere Vaisnavas elected who understand the purpose of the GBC is not to excercise centralized corporate control, but to maintain the siddhanta and standards of sankirtana.

[Shakti-Fan]

 

How can we really feel separation from Sri guru if don't actually meet and serve that person in the vapu form? So when the devotees in a particular Math sanga will want to be with their guru as much as possible how can we fault them? But of course its obvious that they will be less concerned with our Srila Prabhupada, but what can we do?

What many don't understand is that Srila Prabhupada in some of his letters was trying assuage the pain of separation from him by his disciples. When Uddhava put forth similar teachings or arguments to the gopis, they rejected them. The gopis said something like, "we are not jnanis, we are simple village girls, so your arguments do not hold any weight with us". So the idea that guru and Krsna are everywhere held no weight with the gopis because no philosophy or siddhantic truth was strong enough to temper their separation from Krsna. Did Srila Prabhupada's "new" devotees have the background and experience in Gaudiya Vaisnavism to write back and say, "this philosophy if good but we still miss you, so much?" Do you think that this would have displeased Srila Prabhupada?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Alex, you maintain a veneer of politeness in your postings, but doesn't sincere dialog require at least acknowledgement of questions asked of one, an answer, or at least an admission that one does not know the answer?

 

I do hope you will answer stonehearted's question (it looks like you have not replied since he posed it) as well as mine regarding whose example we are better advised to follow, that of Srila Prabhupada and Sriman Mahaprabhu, or that of Lord Brahma (which you have clearly ignored).

 

Also, while I understand you very much appreciate a certain book, is it not rude to, in conversation, post lengthy quotes rather than addressing questions and challenges posed by using your own synthesis of what you've read?

 

Wasn't it *you* who, early on in the discussion, made some sanctimonious statement regarding parroting plattitudes? Isn't that exactly what you do by posting large excerpts from the work of someone else without explaining exactly how the quote is cogent?

 

Also, you misinterpret me when I say your position is tenuous. While English may not be your first language, you seem rather proficient at expressing yourself in it. Writing, to my knowledge, cannot be tenuous. Rather, I claim your *position* of accepting the vani of Srila Prabhupada as a substitute for the vapuh of a pure devotee is a tenuous and dangerous one. I hope you understand the distinction.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Along the lines of simply accepting common wisdom without thoroughly examining it for ourselves, let me quote my own song from this past summer:

 

Spontaneous

 

by MM

 

<table bgcolor="#000000" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td><embed quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000" width="328" height="94" src="http://res0.esnips.com/escentral/images/widgets/flash/esnips_player.swf" flashvars="theTheme=silver&autoPlay=no&theFile=http://www.esnips.com//nsdoc/bab66d80-3c9e-468b-95c8-c251095d8bf2&theName=Maitreya - Spontaneous [DEMO]&thePlayerURL=http://res0.esnips.com/escentral/images/widgets/flash/mp3WidgetPlayer.swf"></embed></td></tr><tr><td><table cellpadding="2" style="font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; padding-left:2px; color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration:none ; ; font-size:10px; font-weight:bold"><tr><td><a style="color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration:none " href="http://www.esnips.com/CreateWidgetAction.ns?type=0&objectid=bab66d80-3c9e-468b-95c8-c251095d8bf2"> Get this widget </a></td><td style="font-size:7px; font-weight:normal;">|</td><td align="center"><a align="center" style="color:#FFFFFF; text-decoration:none " href="http://www.esnips.com/doc/bab66d80-3c9e-468b-95c8-c251095d8bf2/Maitreya---Spontaneous-[DEMO]/?widget=flash_player_esnips_silver"> Track details </a></td><td style="font-size:7px; font-weight:normal;">|</td><td><a align="center" style="color:#FF6600; text-decoration:none" href="http://www.esnips.com//adserver/?action=visit&cid=player_dna&url=/socialdna"> eSnips Social DNA </a></td></tr></table></td></tr></table>

 

How much of our lives is scripted?

How much do we mimic what we see depicted?

How many of my attitudes are truly mine?

And how many slogans did I read on a sign?

 

My exterior may look tough

Though my heart is quite fragile

Emotionally lame

Though my mind is quite agile

 

Sorry if I just can't stick to the script

I try to be "normal" but my mind is flipped

You might feel like whimsy [feeling] is a bit extraneous

But I'm only really happy when I'm being spontaneous

[Alex J]

 

Alex, you maintain a veneer of politeness in your postings, but doesn't sincere dialog require at least acknowledgement of questions asked of one, an answer, or at least an admission that one does not know the answer?

 

Dear Murali Mohan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. I am currently visiting relatives, and did not plan to be posting for the next few days.

 

I apreciate stonehearted Prabhu's post and his question. I did not want to simply fire off a quick response. I'm in the process of carefully considering what he's written. I would like to respond when I've digested it some more.

 

 

I do hope you will answer stonehearted's question (it looks like you have not replied since he posed it) as well as mine regarding whose example we are better advised to follow, that of Srila Prabhupada and Sriman Mahaprabhu, or that of Lord Brahma (which you have clearly ignored).

Thank you for bringing attention to this. Please give me a few days.

 

 

Also, while I understand you very much appreciate a certain book, is it not rude to, in conversation, post lengthy quotes rather than addressing questions and challenges posed by using your own synthesis of what you've read?

 

Thank you for helping me to see how you experience some of what I shared.

 

 

Wasn't it *you* who, early on in the discussion, made some sanctimonious statement regarding parroting plattitudes?

 

Yes, I made a reference to a scene from the movie Idiocracy.

 

 

Isn't that exactly what you do by posting large excerpts from the work of someone else without explaining exactly how the quote is cogent?

 

If you would prefer that I put the ideas in my own words, and link them more closely to the context of the questions asked, then I can endeavour to do that. The responses might take a little longer, but perhaps that's ok.

 

 

Also, you misinterpret me when I say your position is tenuous. While English may not be your first language, you seem rather proficient at expressing yourself in it. Writing, to my knowledge, cannot be tenuous. Rather, I claim your *position* of accepting the vani of Srila Prabhupada as a substitute for the vapuh of a pure devotee is a tenuous and dangerous one. I hope you understand the distinction.

I think I understood clearly what you meant, when you wrote "Rather, the more you write, the more dangerous and tenuous you reveal your position to be."

 

When I wrote: "I accept that [you] may experience what I'm writing here as being tenuous and dangerous", I was refering to the content of what I was presenting, the ideas, the stand, the position.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Thank you for your patience, Alex-ji. Please forgive me my quibbles. Feel free to quote. I find the quotes interesting. If I had a better command of shastra (including the writings of Srila Gurudev and Param Gurudev), I would be best advised to limit myself to posting from it.

 

Enjoy your visit with yor relatives. Truly, they are fotunate to have your association, as am I.

 

My family waits for me, so I'd best head out myself.

 

Nitai-Gaura-Premanande!

 

 

Dear Murali Mohan Prabhu,

 

Thank you for your response. I am currently visiting relatives, and did not plan to be posting for the next few days.

 

I apreciate stonehearted Prabhu's post and his question. I did not want to simply fire off a quick response. I'm in the process of carefully considering what he's written. I would like to respond when I've digested it some more.

 

 

Thank you for bringing attention to this. Please give me a few days.

 

 

 

Thank you for helping me to see how you experience some of what I shared.

 

 

 

Yes, I made a reference to a scene from the movie Idiocracy.

 

 

 

If you would prefer that I put the ideas in my own words, and link them more closely to the context of the questions asked, then I can endeavour to do that. The responses might take a little longer, but perhaps that's ok.

 

 

I think I understood clearly what you meant, when you wrote "Rather, the more you write, the more dangerous and tenuous you reveal your position to be."

 

When I wrote: "I accept that [you] may experience what I'm writing here as being tenuous and dangerous", I was refering to the content of what I was presenting, the ideas, the stand, the position.

 

Sincerely,

Alex

[stonehearted]

 

I apreciate stonehearted Prabhu's post and his question. I did not want to simply fire off a quick response. I'm in the process of carefully considering what he's written. I would like to respond when I've digested it some more.

 

I happy to read that, Alex. I did not intend that as a rhetorical question, nor did I intend it to shut you down. I think Dhira Govinda's idea is provocative in a way that ought to generate more discussion in ISKCON than it seems to have so far. I look forward to your response.

 

In the meantime, enjoy the holidays with your family. I'm spending my first holidays away from my family since I married in 1973. I'm at a godbrother's ashram in Northern California, perhaps preparing for the next stage of my life.

 

And please feel free to call me Babhru.

[suchandra]

 

In a way, after Srila Prabhupada's disappearance pastime, it looks to me like the members of the ISKCON organization find themselves "suddenly free of adult supervision", they "play at forming their own instinctive society", and they "unsuccessfully try to govern themselves and consequently have disastrous results".

 

 

 

"The more pure one becomes, the more one is fallen", but because we have now the guidance of the

Guru Resolve Committee -- another group of enlightened souls posing as the "higher authority" for gurus and GBCs

 

 

to give "psychotherapy" to the failing "mahabhagavata" pure devotees - things seem to be in the right order.

[mahak]

Haribol, and thanx, murali, for giving us music to type by, all threads should have em. Im listening to "Its all to much", and highly recommend this masterpiece.

 

I just wanted to speak up about my dear godbrother, dhirs govinda's prominant link project. Our friend alex has worked very hard on this project as well, and I am honored to read his work.

 

As yall know, Im not a great fan of either the so-called rtvik theory or those who expound it. The reason I have reservations is that the basis is questionable documentation in which even the most vocal will admit is fragmented and often not at all contextual.

 

Prominant Link, however, has not used such things as an obscure GBC meeting where Srila Prabhupada makes a brief appearance or a document produced by a secretary to expound the ideology of guru tattwa. Prominant Link does not reject the idea of disciplic succession, meaning disciples continue guru tattwa. In presenting ideas on how the ISKCON society should function, PL merely refers to shastra and good documentation to show that disciples, indeed, do carry out the missionary works of the acaryas.

 

I have never rejected the idea of a disciple who may initiate on behalf of the spiritual master, regardless of the appearance/disappearance of whom (s)he represents. My rejection of rtvik as presented is that the movement is a contrived program of officiality that has all the earmarkings of eccliastic religiosity, degrading the vyasasana to a chair with a statue on it. However, the disciple has full right to not only initiate in proxy for hisw guru, but may also choose to initiate by the same authority as "regular guru". To the chagrin of rtviks, I have always maintained that the rtvik must have ALL the qualifications of regulkar guru to properly represent srila prabhupada.

 

I deeply appreciate PL for this reason. The conclusions are drawn without the need for all the buzzy documents like M28 and J9. I always read PL with an open mind, and virtually accept the conclusions of such. I dont have this acceptance at all when doing the PADA or Final Order stuff, because I always place my hands directly into the wounds of Lord Jesus Christ. My doubt is my armor.

 

Hare Krsna, and merry Mary mas.

 

ys, mahaksadasa

[suchandra]

 

Haribol, and thanx, murali, for giving us music to type by, all threads should have em. Im listening to "Its all to much", and highly recommend this masterpiece.

 

I just wanted to speak up about my dear godbrother, dhirs govinda's prominant link project. Our friend alex has worked very hard on this project as well, and I am honored to read his work.

 

As yall know, Im not a great fan of either the so-called rtvik theory or those who expound it. The reason I have reservations is that the basis is questionable documentation in which even the most vocal will admit is fragmented and often not at all contextual.

 

Prominant Link, however, has not used such things as an obscure GBC meeting where Srila Prabhupada makes a brief appearance or a document produced by a secretary to expound the ideology of guru tattwa. Prominant Link does not reject the idea of disciplic succession, meaning disciples continue guru tattwa. In presenting ideas on how the ISKCON society should function, PL merely refers to shastra and good documentation to show that disciples, indeed, do carry out the missionary works of the acaryas.

 

I have never rejected the idea of a disciple who may initiate on behalf of the spiritual master, regardless of the appearance/disappearance of whom (s)he represents. My rejection of rtvik as presented is that the movement is a contrived program of officiality that has all the earmarkings of eccliastic religiosity, degrading the vyasasana to a chair with a statue on it. However, the disciple has full right to not only initiate in proxy for hisw guru, but may also choose to initiate by the same authority as "regular guru". To the chagrin of rtviks, I have always maintained that the rtvik must have ALL the qualifications of regulkar guru to properly represent srila prabhupada.

 

I deeply appreciate PL for this reason. The conclusions are drawn without the need for all the buzzy documents like M28 and J9. I always read PL with an open mind, and virtually accept the conclusions of such. I dont have this acceptance at all when doing the PADA or Final Order stuff, because I always place my hands directly into the wounds of Lord Jesus Christ. My doubt is my armor.

 

Hare Krsna, and merry Mary mas.

 

ys, mahaksadasa

 

Thanks so much prabhu, well yes, it is rather boring to again discuss things like recent, "Letter about SDG - by SDG", and it looks like "Dandavats.com" fully agrees to your proposal and is not very happy about the idea of posting SDG's admission: that he has been a lusty man all the while he has been posing as their biggest guru writer - scholar. We have enough with all these disturbing people, always contending that Krishna's divine successor gurus are "falling down" into illicit sex, even with married disciples - chasing their followers wives for sex. Of course we mainly find that priests are experiencing this type of "lusting after others wives" difficulty and not Jesus - God's representative. But who cares - nobody cares!

 

 

Better to meditate on joyful katha - krishna music at youtube.com.