New booklet about Srila Prabhupada

[mud]

 

Srila Prabhupada kept it a secret and he had his reasons i.e. the siddha-pranali aversion.

 

BSST was much more outspoken than Srila Prabhupada about siddha-pranali, and yet his disciples have contemplated and put forth an opinion on his svarupa. The importance of the disciples considering the svarupa of their guru is also spoken of in the booklet. Give it a read! I have, and it gives a lot to think about.

 

Siddha-pranali is criticized by our recent acarya's because they preferred the path of revelation through nama-sankirtana over the process of siddha-pranali diksa which could potentially degrade into a cheap process without substantial result.

 

Regarding reading all of Prabhupada's books, Sridhar Maharaj did not have to; he knew the spirit of his godbrother and certainly knew the philosophy contained in his books. Plenty of Prabhupada's disciples who have read all of his books still hold the same feelings about Prabhupada's svarupa.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

BSST was much more outspoken than Srila Prabhupada about siddha-pranali, and yet his disciples have contemplated and put forth an opinion on his svarupa. The importance of the disciples considering the svarupa of their guru is also spoken of in the booklet. Give it a read! I have, and it gives a lot to think about.

 

Siddha-pranali is criticized by our recent acarya's because they preferred the path of revelation through nama-sankirtana over the process of siddha-pranali diksa which could potentially degrade into a cheap process without substantial result.

 

Regarding reading all of Prabhupada's books, Sridhar Maharaj did not have to; he knew the spirit of his godbrother and certainly knew the philosophy contained in his books. Plenty of Prabhupada's disciples who have read all of his books still hold the same feelings about Prabhupada's svarupa.

You seem like a very nice devotee and kind person, so I will I reserve my most cutting comments.

 

But, factually, where in the instructions of Guru and Gauranga do we get any instructions that we should try to sort out the mysterious and esoteric rasa of the acharya that he seemed to want to keep secret?

 

If Prabhupada wanted his disciples to know his rasa and his identity as a parshada wouldn't he have just come out and revealed it?

 

If it is so mysterious and secretive, then should we really try to sort it out and post it publicly?

[Sukhada]

 

Srila Sridhara Maharaja's own opinion on the matter was that Srila Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa. However, due to the complaints of some and his harmonizing nature, he gave an alternative way of thinking about it.

That is an opinion that cannot be confirmed by any documented statements of Srila Sridhar Maharaja.

 

"When he departed from this consciousness of worldly preaching propaganda, then he is there. It is clearly expressed in these sayings there in the Atlantic. He discovered the unmanifest (aprakata) pastimes in Vrndavana, and in Vrndavana he established Krsna-Balarama and Gaura-Nitai. That is indicative of sakhya-rasa. From this we can conclude that he is in sakhya-rasa, and he has entered into those pastimes. This is my understanding about his present position." (Srila Sridhara Maharaja)

 

The opinion of Srila Sridhara Maharaja is clear for the unbiased. But it is far from all that you will have to contend with, not the least of which is Srila Prabhupada's own words.

[Sukhada]

 

You seem like a very nice devotee and kind person, so I will I reserve my most cutting comments.

 

But, factually, where in the instructions of Guru and Gauranga do we get any instructions that we should try to sort out the mysterious and esoteric rasa of the acharya that he seemed to want to keep secret?

 

If Prabhupada wanted his disciples to know his rasa and his identity as a parshada wouldn't he have just come out and revealed it?

 

If it is so mysterious and secretive, then should we really try to sort it out and post it publicly?

The answer to this one is in Chapter 1: Introduction. A good a place as any for you to begin.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

"When he departed from this consciousness of worldly preaching propaganda, then he is there. It is clearly expressed in these sayings there in the Atlantic. He discovered the unmanifest (aprakata) pastimes

in Vrndavana, and in Vrndavana he established Krsna-Balarama and Gaura-Nitai. That is indicative of sakhya-rasa. From this we can conclude that he is in sakhya-rasa, and he has entered into those pastimes.

This is my understanding about his present position." (Srila Sridhara Maharaja)

 

 

 

That is just a snippet.

I am sorry, but I heard him say things that were not so definite.

 

On this matter, I am not accepting a snippet.

 

Please post all the statements Sridhar Maharaja made on the subject and not just a few words that support your belief.

 

He said things that made exception to this statement.

 

Little snippets can never be conclusive without the total body of statements.

[mud]

 

But, factually, where in the instructions of Guru and Gauranga do we get any instructions that we should try to sort out the mysterious and esoteric rasa of the acharya that he seemed to want to keep secret?

 

If Prabhupada wanted his disciples to know his rasa and his identity as a parshada wouldn't he have just come out and revealed it?

 

If we want to serve guru in the world beyond this, we better try to figure out where he is! We are not going to the spiritual world to serve Krsna first hand, we are das das anudas. So where is that das that I have come to love and serve in this world, who pointed me to that world? That is what I want to find out, so I know where I'm going after I get tired of serving false masters here.

 

He didn't come right out and reveal it, because in the same spirit of his guru he did not want to cheapen these thing. What is that quote of his when someone asked him who he was in the spiritual world? "If I told you, you wouldn't believe me."

 

To talk about this publicly is a glorification of him. Look at how he is talked about all over the internet right now... Ritvik, Sampradaya Acarya, Prominent Link. I personally think it's nice to hear some more inspirational discussion of Prabhupada than this stuff that has been boring me for so many years...

[Beggar]

 

"When he departed from this consciousness of worldly preaching propaganda, then he is there. It is clearly expressed in these sayings there in the Atlantic. He discovered the unmanifest (aprakata) pastimes in Vrndavana, and in Vrndavana he established Krsna-Balarama and Gaura-Nitai. That is indicative of sakhya-rasa. From this we can conclude that he is in sakhya-rasa, and he has entered into those pastimes. This is my understanding about his present position." (Srila Sridhara Maharaja)

 

The opinion of Srila Sridhara Maharaja is clear for the unbiased. But it is far from all that you will have to contend with, not the least of which is Srila Prabhupada's own words.

I can't find the quote but I clearly remember Srila Sridhar Maharaja explaining how closely Subala and Srimati Radharani resemble each other, so much so, that in the lila where they exchanged clothes Krsna was clearly deceived. The jist of his explanation was just how closely sakhya and madhurya are related and how sakhya is contained within the adi-rasa, madhurya. Then he explained that perhaps Srila Prabhupada was perhaps only showing sakhya rasa as his temporary manifestation of Nityananda-avesa but that perhaps his real rasa could be madhurya. This is how I heard it, that he enumerated the evidence for sakhya but left the door open for madhurya. Based on this I'm not really sure why certain Srila Sridhar Maharaja followers have run so hard with sakhya rasa?

[Sonic Yogi]

 

"When he departed from this consciousness of worldly preaching propaganda, then he is there. It is clearly expressed in these sayings there in the Atlantic. He discovered the unmanifest (aprakata) pastimes in Vrndavana, and in Vrndavana he established Krsna-Balarama and Gaura-Nitai. That is indicative of sakhya-rasa. From this we can conclude that he is in sakhya-rasa, and he has entered into those pastimes. This is my understanding about his present position." (Srila Sridhara Maharaja)

 

The opinion of Srila Sridhara Maharaja is clear for the unbiased. But it is far from all that you will have to contend with, not the least of which is Srila Prabhupada's own words.

Don't ignore that Sridhar Maharaja said "his present position".

Sridhar Maharaja was designated "Bhakti-rakshaka".

 

So, if Srila Prabhupada was trying to conceal his madhurya-rasa and manifest some sakhya-rasa for his global preaching rasa, then Sridhar Maharaja would be the last one to interfere with that.

 

Take note, Sridhar Maharaja said "his present position" was sakhya-rasa and not his eternal position.

 

His "present position" at that time was as a shaktya-vesha avatar of Lord Nityananda.

 

His eternal position in Krishna lila could be something else.

 

 

 

Are you sure you really want to debate with me?

I have been debating on these forums for several years.

I might shatter some of your notions.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

I can't find the quote but I clearly remember Srila Sridhar Maharaja explaining how closely Subala and Srimati Radharani resemble each other, so much so, that in the lila where they exchanged clothes Krsna was clearly deceived. The jist of his explanation was just how closely sakhya and madhurya are related and how sakhya is contained within the adi-rasa, madhurya. Then he explained that perhaps Srila Prabhupada was perhaps only showing sakhya rasa as his temporary manifestation of Nityananda-avesa but that perhaps his real rasa could be madhurya. This is how I heard it, that he enumerated the evidence for sakhya but left the door open for madhurya. Based on this I'm not really sure why certain Srila Sridhar Maharaja followers have run so hard with sakhya rasa?

 

That is the same way I understood it.

At least I am not alone in this world.

[stonehearted]

As I mention in my article, I don't see anything to be gained by "debating" such a topic. That's certainly not why I wrote this. I think I should also point out that there's nothing there hinting at anything like the siddha-pranali process. Srila Prabhupada made some hints and some explicit statements. But he never made this an issue. I think it helps explain a number of things, and it may open our sampradaya to perspectives that have been occulted by certain elements of our family.

 

With regard to Srila Sridhara Maharaja's comments about Srila Prabhupada's "present position," my understanding is that he was talking about Prabhupada's position at that time, after his disappearance. Yogi may have another understanding, and I respect that. I don't see what there is to gain by arguing it. And I can't say I agree with Beggar's assessment that anyone is running so hard with skhya rasa. It's just that when all this evidence is put together in one place, it seems to indicate a particular flavor.

 

I knew when I wrote this that some devotees would get all heated up about this. Nevertheless, I took the opportunity to glorify Srila Prabhupada, even though this risk is there.

 

My understanding of Srila Sridhara Maharaja's statements is discussed in the booklet. I wasn't there; in fact, I felt constrained from approaching him when I had the chance by my service as a gurukula headmaster in Hawaii. That's a big regret. However, based on my conversations with those who did spend time with him, it appears to me that he felt that Srila Prabhupada expressed elements of his own inner life in a number of ways, but he left an opening, in his harmonizing way, when confronted with objections. But he seemed to feel strongly that a taste for sakhya-bhava is strongly indicated by a number of things, including his reading of Prabhupada's "Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Krishna." If you all want to argue about it, "debate" it, then who's going to stop you? This is, after all, Audarya Fellowship, where we tend to go after each other hammer and tongs. This seems to be the national sport here. If anyone's interested in open-minded discussion, that's another thing.

 

And look: I knew that some dear, long-time friends would end up peeved with me for one reason or another. That's nothing new, either. I've been around devotee circles for a long time, and I've been accused of not being one of you, not being ISKCON, being anti-guru, anti-ISKCON, anti-GBC, whatever. I'm not worried about that at all.

[honeydew]

 

That is the same way I understood it.

At least I am not alone in this world.

No, you're not alone. That's the way I understand it as well. Nicely stated, Beggar prabhu.

[suchandra]

 

What I would say is that sadly all this discussion of rasa of the acharya is sorrowfully tied into the siddha-pranali system and Srila Prabhupada avoided it, negated it and keep it a well kept secret.

 

OK, so now let's all take up the siddha-pranali concept.

 

Ultimately, none of it is up for debate or discussion.

It is a private matter between the guru and disciple.

 

Hence, I prefer to see Srila Prabhupada as an incarnation of Godhead and not really come to a solid conclusion about his rasa with Krsna as a parshada.

 

I really don't know for sure and I don't think anyone knows for sure.

Srila Prabhupada kept it a secret and he had his reasons i.e. the siddha-pranali aversion.

There are still lots of Vaishnavas who are very concerned about the "inner life" of Srila Prabhupada and themselves. Meanwhile, the citizens of the ISKCON society are suffering terribly because Srila Sridhara Maharaja strongly backed the post-1977 guru appointment that has been forcing tens of thousands of innocent young Vaishnavas into the state of becoming ex-disciples and thousands senior Vaishnavas to become "home-based".

 

This is because the GBC gurus and their chief post-1977 advisor Srila Sridhara Maharaja rubber stamp guru - acharyas without even making a preliminary study of their "inner" realizations.

 

And while all of this was going on Swami BV Tripurari was also trying to get "voted in as guru" by the meanwhile infamous eleven, or else he threatened the eleven -- he'd go get voted in as guru by Srila Sridhara Maharaja if they wouldn't pacify his need to be also one of the next acaryas.

 

That all those neophyte gurus were causing thousands of devotees to leave ISKCON was never a topic of those neophyte gurus. So there seems to be only concern for their own acarya's positions and not so much for the citizens.

 

This is why some devotees are now writing their problems since they lost their jobs, their benefits are running out and etc and still there are no farms, no varnasrama, no place for them to go in ISKCON. One child who recently committed suicide in San Francisco left a note, "There is no place for me in ISKCON."

 

Says it all! So this is the apparent problem, they are worried about their inner life, and their silk saffron clothes, golden Rolex watches, flashy new Volvos etc., and not so much for the ISKCON family of Srila Prabhupada. And ISKCON even admitting, 92% of our members are home-based. In other words, the Vaishnavas temples in the West are in a state to disappear.

[Beggar]

I did some research and I found a statement by Tripuari Maharaja that I was unaware of:

May 30, 2000, Vol. II, No. 22

Srila Prabhupada: Sakhya or Srngara-Rasa?

Q & A with Swami B. V. Tripurari

 

 

It should be noted that it is possible that one disciple may experience his Gurudeva as a representative of srngara-rasa, while another will experience him as representing Subala in sakhya-rasa. This is discussed in Jaiva Dharma. So, if some of Prabhupada's disciples experience the influence of sakhya-bhava in Srila Prabhupada and are inspired by this, there is no harm. Let their ruci be their guide.

This should end any reason for debating the issue.

But I still cannot agree with statement despite the quote that preceded it:

 

 

The opinion of Srila Sridhara Maharaja is clear for the unbiased. But it is far from all that you will have to contend with, not the least of which is Srila Prabhupada's own words.

 

The reason being that it was Srila Sridhar Maharaja who gave so much information to the devotees about madhurya rasa and that is why they we wondering why Srila Prabhupada would be in sakhya in light of that, considering that his guru and prime param guru were in madhurya (which was clearly revealed by Srila Sridhar Maharaja). So it wasn't as if the devotees there pushed Srila Sridhar Maharaja to harmonize with the madhurya conception but rather it was in the context of what he was teaching at the time; so some of the participants could not but help wonder.

 

Also consider how Srila Sridhar Maharaja a corrected the English translation of this verse of a poem by Srila Prabhupada aboard the Jaladutta:

 

krsna taba punya habe bhai

e−punya koribe jabe radharani khusi habe

dhruva ati boli toma tai

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brothers, you will obtain your good fortune from the Supreme Lord Krsna only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that it should be changed to read:

 

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brother, Sri Krsna you will obtain your good fortune only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Calling Krsna brother, seems to indicate some sakhya relation, or does it since a madhurya, Rupanuga - Radha dasyam idea seems to be given? So it was in this context the madhurya questions were asked about Srila Prabhupada's rasa, not that the Gopi Bhava Club had suddenly shown up.

[Narasingh]

 

If we want to serve guru in the world beyond this, we better try to figure out where he is! We are not going to the spiritual world to serve Krsna first hand, we are das das anudas. So where is that das that I have come to love and serve in this world, who pointed me to that world? That is what I want to find out, so I know where I'm going after I get tired of serving false masters here.

 

He didn't come right out and reveal it, because in the same spirit of his guru he did not want to cheapen these thing. What is that quote of his when someone asked him who he was in the spiritual world? "If I told you, you wouldn't believe me."

 

To talk about this publicly is a glorification of him. Look at how he is talked about all over the internet right now... Ritvik, Sampradaya Acarya, Prominent Link. I personally think it's nice to hear some more inspirational discussion of Prabhupada than this stuff that has been boring me for so many years...

Here is the paradox.

 

How is it that, while Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati is a manjari, Srila Prabhupada may or may not be a sakha. If there is one thing more certain than whether or not Srila Prabhupada is a sakha, it is that his ultimate desire is the service of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

 

Is it feasible to consider that Srila Prabhupada doesn't really want to serve Srila Bhaktisiddhanta in the spiritual world so he is a sakha instead? (I think not).

 

The crux of the matter is if Srila Prabhupada is a sakha and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati is a manjari, what hope do you have of manipulating your position in eternal Lila? Manipulation is a product of exploitation, which is vehemently disposed of by our Gaudiya Parampara in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

 

In a sense, even if this booklet is wrong, it is still the right thing to preach, since it will shake up the belief that we can manipulate ourselves into Lila. It has the potential to encourage Saranagati which looks towards descending Grace.

 

I am looking forward to reading your booklet, Babhru Prabhu!

[stonehearted]

 

Also consider how Srila Sridhar Maharaja a corrected the English translation of this verse of a poem by Srila Prabhupada aboard the Jaladutta:

 

krsna taba punya habe bhai

e−punya koribe jabe radharani khusi habe

dhruva ati boli toma tai

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brothers, you will obtain your good fortune from the Supreme Lord Krsna only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja said that it should be changed to read:

 

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brother, Sri Krsna you will obtain your good fortune only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Calling Krsna brother, seems to indicate some sakhya relation, or does it since a madhurya, Rupanuga - Radha dasyam idea seems to be given? So it was in this context the madhurya questions were asked about Srila Prabhupada's rasa, not that the Gopi Bhava Club had suddenly shown up.

Srila Prabhupada called that song "Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Krishna." The entire song is a direct address to Krishna, including that opening stanza. Srila Sridhara Maharaja certainly understood Bengali better than Jayascinandana, and the same goes for the several native Bengalis I've asked about that line. The verdict has been unanimous: that bhai is singular. The plural is different. And that bhai addresses Krishna, as does everything in the poem.

 

What we see is that Srila Prabhupada, in utter humility, sees himself as unfit to carry out the task given him. It is, after all, enormous, unthinkable. No one had done it; even those sent by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati to England in the '30s had very limited success. So he makes a bargain with Krishna, whom he sees as his friend (the manjaris aren't going to roll in the pastures and chase cows with Krishna): my gurudeva gave me this order, and I clearly cannot pull it off on my own. But if you help me, then I'll certainly succeed, and, by implication, my gurudeva may put in a good word for you to Radharani, so you will become fortunate.

 

With this clear understanding, the nature of the song becomes quite clear, it seems to me.

[stonehearted]

 

The crux of the matter is if Srila Prabhupada is a sakha and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati is a manjari, what hope do you have of manipulating your position in eternal Lila? Manipulation is a product of exploitation, which is vehemently disposed of by our Gaudiya Parampara in the line of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati.

There's no question of such manipulation. It is in fact the polar opposite of our real position, which is to accept our essential identity as Krishna's eternal servant.

 

 

In a sense, even if this booklet is wrong, it is still the right thing to preach, since it will shake up the belief that we can manipulate ourselves into Lila. It has the potential to encourage Saranagati which looks towards descending Grace.

 

Bingo! What we see in both the prayers Srila Prabhupada wrote on the Jaladuta is saranagati in the extreme. Srila Jiva Goswami says in Bhakti-sandarbha (I think it's Bhakti-sandarbha) that of the six angas of saranagati, goptrtve-varanam (acceptance of Krishna as our sole maintainer) is the svarupa lakshana, the core principle. And in these prayers Srila Prabhupada expresses his utter dependence on Krishna. What a glorious example! And I can tell you that considering all this evidence together has enlivened me in my attempt at surrender. It would only be through such surrender that any interest in Srila Prabhupada's, or my own, inner life would make any sense.

 

I haven't written this to encourage any of us to contemplate our own navels, but to see how broad the Krishna consciousness movement is, how magnanimous Mahaprabhu and Nityananda Prabhu--and Srila Prabhupada--are, and to encourage us to share that gift with others.

[Sonic Yogi]

As an example of how we can take one statement by the acharya and wrongly deduct some conclusion about his rasa with Krishna, we can look at the dedication at the beginning of Krsna Book.

 

 

To My Father Gour Mohan De (1849-1930)

 

a pure devotee of Krsna, who raised me as a Krsna conscious child from the beginning of my life. In my boyhood he instructed me how to play the mridanga. He gave me Radha-Krsna vigraha to worship, and he gave me Jagannatha-ratha to duly observe the festival as my childhood play. He was kind to me, and I imbibed from him the ideas later on solidified by my spiritual master, the eternal father.

 

In this statement by Srila Prabhupada would could deduct that Srila Prabhupada's relationship with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati was in vatsalya-rasa as Srila Prabhupada referred to him as the "eternal father".

 

If we wanted to get carried away we could deduct that in Krsna-lila Srila Saraswati Thakur must be in vatsalya-rasa and Srila Prabhupada must be his child in Vrindavan.

 

 

So, it is easy to get carried away with speculation if we look at isolated statements without considering the total body of evidence.

 

There are no snippets that give the complete picture.

 

We have to look at all the available indicators and possibly make a judgement based on that.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

There are still lots of Vaishnavas who are very concerned about the "inner life" of Srila Prabhupada and themselves. Meanwhile, the citizens of the ISKCON society are suffering terribly because Srila Sridhara Maharaja strongly backed the post-1977 guru appointment that has been forcing tens of thousands of innocent young Vaishnavas into the state of becoming ex-disciples and thousands senior Vaishnavas to become "home-based".

 

This is because the GBC gurus and their chief post-1977 advisor Srila Sridhara Maharaja rubber stamp guru - acharyas without even making a preliminary study of their "inner" realizations.

We have proven on a number of occasions that Srila Sridhar Maharaja was lied to by the senior men who went to him after the passing of Srila Prabhupada on the recommendation of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Sridhar Maharaja supported the zonal acharya fiasco because he was told by the senior disciples of Srila Prabhupada that they were appointed as zonal acharyas by Srila Prabhupada.

 

How many times do we have to tell you that?

 

Later, Sridhar Maharaja decided that it was not possible that Srila Prabhupada appointed them as zonal gurus and withdrew all his support for that system.

 

On this issue you are way off.

You need to get your facts straight before you go making such ignorant remarks.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

Translation: I emphatically say to you, O brother, Sri Krsna you will obtain your good fortune only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with you.

 

Calling Krsna brother, seems to indicate some sakhya relation, or does it since a madhurya, Rupanuga - Radha dasyam idea seems to be given? .

 

Brother?

Isn't Balarama the brother of Krishna?

Nityananda the same Lord Balaram?

 

So, if Prabhupada was shaktyavesha of Nityananda, then referring to Krishna as "brother" and telling him "you will get lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon you", seems to be a strong indicator that Sridhar Maharaja was right about him being shaktyvesha of Nityananda and this little song by Prabhupada seems to show that.

 

Sridhar Maharaja said that shaktyavesha means that the Lord actually enters into the heart of the devotee and does his deeds.

 

So, if Nityananda had descended as an avatar into the heart of Srila Prabhupada, then of course some sakhya-rasa sentiments would be prominent in the person of Srila Prabhupada at that time.

 

So, Prabhupada refers to Krishna as "brother" and teases him about getting lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon him.

 

Sounds like something only Lord Balaram could say.

[mud]

 

Here is the paradox.

 

Is it feasible to consider that Srila Prabhupada doesn't really want to serve Srila Bhaktisiddhanta in the spiritual world so he is a sakha instead? (I think not).

No, it is not feasible that Srila Prabhupada would not be a servant of his guru in Goloka. And no also, this is not a paradox. As Rupa Goswami explains, there are sakhas with a mix of madhurya sentiment. There are sakha's who are involved in Krsna's love life, just as there are manjari's who are involved from the other side with Radha. These sakha's have relationship, friendship and service to gopi's in assistance to the union of Radha and Krsna.

 

The BBT translation of the "Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Krsna" just does not do it justice, and so I would argue that Sridhar Maharaj's rendering is much more indicative of the true spirit where BBT's is a manipulation which creates different meaning altogether. Bhai is singular, and Prabhupada is talking to Krsna; not to any brothers - as in conditioned souls. If Prabhupada is talking to his "brother", saying that Radha will be pleased with Him if He assists in the service desired by Radha's servant (BSST), it really implies where Prabhupada's bhava is at and where BSST's is at and they work together wonderfully.

 

Then when you add the "playing in the fields of vraja with You, herding cows", is there any doubt? This prayer is personal, and before his preaching campaign started. This is not "preaching" in any way, because he didn't have anyone to preach to yet. He is by himself, utterly dependent, and expressing his feelings to his only support. It's like we are sitting in on a conversation we weren't really supposed to hear and he is telling secrets.

[Sonic Yogi]

And after the disappearance of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaj, Srila Sridhar Maharaj declared:

 

 

"I consider him to be saktyavesa avatara, and it is confirmed in his writings on his spiritual journey through the Atlantic. How he landed there in America, and the nature of his beginning the movement, his intense degree of dedication to Krishna and dependence, and how much he made himself empty of any other desire than the order of his Gurudev, quite empty that Krishna came down to help him, and it is corroborated that Krishna worked on his behalf. In his poem, Prayer to the Lotus Feet of Krishna, we find him pleading with Krishna, "My dear Brother, Your good fortune will come to You only when Srimati Radharani becomes pleased with You." Seeing his Gurudeva Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati as Radharani's delegation and his order as Her divine service, he humbly submitted that he did not feel himself worthy or fit to discharge the divine service, so he enlisted Krishna in the service of his guru. He had completely dedicated himself to the purpose, he was so earnest in his prayer to Krishna that he may discharge the duty that he has been given by his Guru Maharaj, that divine force, power, came down to help him. Otherwise, it is impossible. It is not a thing of the ordinary level that anyone will do, but the highest thing has been taken down to the lowest position so extensively. It cannot but be the divine power, embodied and in a great intensity and magnitude! So, saktyavesa avatara, I cannot but take him to be so."

So, Sridhar Maharaja confirms that the mood expressed in the song "Prayer at the lotus feet of Krishna", was due to the influence of the shaktyavesha nature of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Sridhar Maharaja said Prabhupada made himself empty and invited Krishna to come down and help him with the mission.

[Sonic Yogi]

Srila Sridhar Maharaj recalls the depth in penetration of their discussions.

 

 

"Once while discussing the verse dadami buddhiyogam tam yena mam upayanti te ["I give them the understanding by which they can come to Me" Bhagavad Gita 10.10] I submitted to him that here, upayanti is indicative of parakiya rasa [paramour relationship] . On this point he agreed with me, saying, 'Yes, at this point there cannot be anything but the parakiya rasa of Vraja. The conclusion of Bhagavad Gita must come to this."

 

So, here in the discussion with Srila Sridhar Maharaja, Srila Prabhupada agrees that the conclusion of the Bhagavad-gita must come to parakiya-rasa.

[stonehearted]

 

Brother?

Isn't Balarama the brother of Krishna?

Nityananda the same Lord Balaram?

 

So, if Prabhupada was shaktyavesha of Nityananda, then referring to Krishna as "brother" and telling him "you will get lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon you", seems to be a strong indicator that Sridhar Maharaja was right about him being shaktyvesha of Nityananda and this little song by Prabhupada seems to show that.

 

Sridhar Maharaja said that shaktyavesha means that the Lord actually enters into the heart of the devotee and does his deeds.

 

So, if Nityananda had descended as an avatar into the heart of Srila Prabhupada, then of course some sakhya-rasa sentiments would be prominent in the person of Srila Prabhupada at that time.

 

So, Prabhupada refers to Krishna as "brother" and teases him about getting lucky only if Radharani is pleased upon him.

 

Sounds like something only Lord Balaram could say.

Actually, Baladeva would probably be a little shy about discussing such a thing. It's said that when Balarama, going up a path on Govardhana, sees sparkley dust, he thinks that Radharani must be with Krishna, and, out of shyness, He turns around, not wanting to intrude. The same is true when Radharani sees sparkley dust; She thinks that Balarama must be with Krishna, so She turns around out of shyness.

 

It sounds, as I point out, more like Subal, who often gives Krishna advice about His romantic life.

 

Bhai means brother, but guys often call each other Brother, or, in the US, Buddy.

[Sonic Yogi]

 

 

It sounds, as I point out, more like Subal, who often gives Krishna advice about His romantic life.

 

 

 

Or even Madhumangal:

 

Kṛṣṇa had one brāhmaṇa friend whose name was Madhumańgala. This boy would joke by playing the part of a greedy brāhmaṇa. Whenever the friends ate, he would eat more than all others, especially laḍḍus, of which he was very fond. Then after eating more laḍḍus than anyone else, Madhumańgala would still not be satisfied, and he would say to Kṛṣṇa, "If You give me one more laḍḍu, then I shall be pleased to give You my blessings so that Your friend Rādhārāṇī will be very much pleased with You."

[Sukhada]

 

That is just a snippet.

I am sorry, but I heard him say things that were not so definite.

 

On this matter, I am not accepting a snippet.

 

Please post all the statements Sridhar Maharaja made on the subject and not just a few words that support your belief.

 

He said things that made exception to this statement.

 

Little snippets can never be conclusive without the total body of statements.

You said that SSM's opinion that SP was in sakhya-rasa "cannot be confirmed by any documented statements" and when I produce such a statement, you reject it as a "snippet." If you want the whole conversation and not an excerpt, see chapter 3 in the booklet.

 

It is very clear there from that statement of Srila Sridhara Maharaja that his opinion was that Srila Prabhupada was in sakhya-rasa.

 

In relation to your argument that the "total body of statements" make Srila Sridhara Maharaja's position less clear, I searched all the statements Srila Sridhara Maharaja made in relation to SP and sakhya-rasa. I found four classes: Feb. 26, 1981, August 14, 1981, Feb. 13, 1983, and Jan. 9, 1984. I don't want to post them all here because I hate when people post endlessly long quotations. Do you have access to the transcriptions of his classes?

 

The first class (2.26.81) is the one given in the link above, where he clearly gives his opinion that SP is in sakhya-rasa. The next one, about six months later, does express madhurya as a possibility. I will excerpt the relevant part here. Please note the markedly different language he uses about the madhurya possibility--"maybe, perhaps, might." It seems obvious to me that he is harmonizing here. It is not his personal opinion:

 

"Devotee: Maharaja, it has been clear now, in a way, that Prabhupada was in sakhya rasa.

 

Sridhara Maharaja: At least temporarily he has showed like that. What he has expressed there in that journey, here it is almost clear that he liked that sort of lila best, but it may be, that he might have suppressed purposely [madhurya-rasa] it also cannot be denied, maybe. That is one thing. There may be such a possibility, and he has given he has told that Radharani was his gurudeva. His gurudeva was Radharani, but he himself was thinking that perhaps madhurya rasa should not be distributed in the first installment. That might have been his view. Because his preaching was mostly helped by Nityananda Prabhu, Baladev; so influenced by their tendency, mood, he might have for the time being had that posing. And another thing...there is another sign that he showed affinity towards sakhya rasa. In Vrndavana, he has installed Baladeva, Krsna Balarama, and Nitai Gaura. Sakhya rasa preference."

 

Note also how he ends by giving another proof for sakhya-rasa (Krsna-Balarama in Vrindavana). If you compare the tone of the first and second class, I think we can agree what his personal opinion was.

 

The third class (2.1383) is an abbreviated version of the first class. He begins by saying, "Sakhya-rasa. I do not know what he has written, but I found it such position from his... only one letter. What he wrote when he was going to America. That letter has been given to me, and I read that, and from there I could suppose that his position is satisfied with that sakhya-lila." He was able to make the assessment that Srila Prabhupada is in sakhya-rasa from one letter. How much more convinced he would be if he had heard all the evidence from the main section of Babhru's booklet?

 

The last class (1.9.84) is extremely similar to the first class. He says, "From that it is clear to me that he is in sakhya rasa. After he finds his satisfaction there. Very earnestness it shows."

 

So if you look honestly and objectively at the Srila Sridhara Maharaja's statements on this issue, he is clearly expressing a personal opinion. However, he is also known for being extremely accommodating, harmonizing, and this is also shown (although it is not his personal opinion).