Some points on the article fom Bhajana Kutir website

jijaji · May 3, 2001

;^)

Jahnava Nitai Das · May 4, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

1 ) Sri Kisori Mohana Gosvami and Sri Kisori Das Babaji witnessed that Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, when asked by Siddha Sri Ramakrsna das Pandit Baba in the early 1930s, declared that he was initiated in a dream.

The entire argument is based on rumors that cannot be substantiated. Well, I personally know that Langa Baba of Rishikesh heard that Kaupin Baba had been told by Sri Ramakrishna Das Pandit Baba that the moon is made of blue cheese. Go figure?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Sannyasa cannot be taken from a photo, without physical permission of the person on the photograph, but from a living sannyasi.

This presumes that it is not possible, while being situated in the stage of samadhi, to have a direct relationship with eternaly liberated souls.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

How can you wear saffron cloth while your would-be sannyasa guru wore white?

Like I said... their socks don't match, thats' proof they're wrong.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

And saffron dhotis do not exist at all, only saffron bahirvasas (outer cloth) for Vedic eka-dandi (mayavadi) sannyasis and white dhotis for householders.

There are plenty of Vaishnava sannyasis who have taken ekadanda sannyasa. To assume that ekadanda sannyasa indicates that one is a mayavadi is a foolish conception and shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Grhasthas should not wear a kaupina (loincloth).

The kaupinam is meant to be worn by all people, begining from childhood. The iron kaupinam is not allowed to be worn by householders.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Shaving the head is also only for sannyasis and not for others.

Every Vedic tradition has prescriptions for shaving the heads of the brahmacharis and brahmanas. The position of the shikha varies according to the lineage. In smarta lines the front of the head is shaved, and the remaining hair is tied into a large shikha. In Vaishnava lines the size and position of the shikha varies according to sampradaya and shaka.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

suklavaso bhaven nityah

"One should always wear white clothe."

...or one's cloth should not be dirty.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

...the ocean of samsara, which is hard to cross by yatis (mayavadi sannyasis)...

Yati does not mean "mayavadi sannyasi". This conception that everything else is "mayavadi" is very childish and displays a clear lack of understanding the various traditions. Sripada Ramanujacharya is also known as yati-raja, as are a number of Vaishnava saints.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

6) Where did Bhaktisiddhanta get his brahmana-thread from?

From that small shop in Navadvipa just next to Gauranga Brass Works on the road connecting to the ghata.

At least thats where I got mine.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

This means that 2nd initiation is not the same as brahmana-initiation.

There is no such thing as a "second initiation" in vedic culture. There are three classifications of initiation, none go by the name "second initiation".

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

"Even the vultures will not eat the dead corpse of the ungrateful one who abandons the amnayagatam guru."

Yes, when the family traditions are preserved, the brahmanas and family gurus are to be respected. But in Kali yuga, when, according to the scriptures, the demons are born in brahmana families, and the caste guru's only business is sense gratification, it is advisable to reject such association in favour of a liberated soul.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

What is the tilaka svarupa of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his followers?

In every vaishnava line there are variations of the tilak based on one's personal mood of surrender. Even within a single sampradaya there are many branches, each with a different tilak representing their process of sharanagati.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

In Hari-bhakti-vilasa (2.85) it is quoted: sampradayika mudradi bhusitam tam krtañjalim, "At the time of initiation the disciple receives the sectarian signs from the guru".

Traditional Vaishnava schools consider mudra to refer to shankha (conch), chakra (discus), gada (club) and padma (lotus), and these symbols should be marked on your body.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Why did Bhaktisiddhanta not wear his guru's tilaka if he was really his disciple?

And why didn't saints like Shyamananda wear the tilak of their initiating gurus? This argument is not sound. Actually none of these arguments have any substance.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

a) In ISKCON/Gaudiya Matha we see everyone ultimately receiving brahmana-initiation. But which varnasrama-society has only brahmanas?

This question is like asking why do all universities create graduates when in society the majority of people are not graduates.

ISKCON and Gaudiya matha are spiritual organizations within the larger society of the world. It is natural for a spiritual organization to create spiritually focussed brahmanas. There are plenty of materialistic people in society, and we shouldn't expect spiritual institutions to have to create them as well.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

...and, what to speak of knowing Sanskrit, the men don't even know Hindi or Bengali...

Nor Russian, nor chinese, nor sign language... I fail to see the spiritual significance of knowing Hindi, which has more connection to Muslim invaders than to the sages of ancient India.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

...or even what the weather is like in India.

Here it is quite hot now. But the monsoon season will be starting soon. Everyone is looking forward to that. The guru's mercy is also like a monsoon cloud that extinguishes the forest fire of repeated birth and death. I wish more people would be looking forward to that monsoon.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Envy is the cause of the mentality: "Nowadays brahmanas are full of faults, so now we will launch our own varnasrama-system."

Spiritually speaking, the brahmanas are factually full of faults nowadays. In Orissa the brahmanas eat fish and drink liquor while continuing to pose as priests and family gurus. In South India, the brahmanas are not so bad, but they all virtually eat onion and garlic, drink tea and cofee, and work mostly as accountants and the such. Nowadays the younger generation has started eating eggs as well, on the grounds that they are "vegetarian". In some traditional holy places such as Udupi and Sri Rangam you can still find a few brahmanas who follow proper principles. In Udupi there is even a restaraunt(hotel) next to the Krishna Temple that cooks without onion and garlic and remains closed on Ekadashis. Such things are very rare though.

Regardless, the scriptures tell us that everyone is born a shudra, and by samskara they are elevated to the position of a brahmana. And elsewhere it is stated that in the age of Kali everyone is born a shudra.

Throughout the modern history of India, the brahmanas have greatly exploited the lower castes, to the point that they are now suffering the consequences of their actions.

Only a fool would think the glorification in the scriptures of brahmanas referred to the modern birth-based caste.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

The Bhagavata (7.11.13) declares that a brahmana must first be born in a family that has always, throughout the generations, followed all the samskaras for brahmanas.

No, this verse does not say that. Samskaras are not only for brahmanas. There are samskaras for all varnas.

Regardless, there are countless examples of those belonging to other varnas acquiring the status of a brahmana. For example, Kaushika (Vishvamitra) was a Kshatriya, but by tapasya he became a brahma-rishi. Valmiki was a shudra, but by chanting the name of Rama he became a brahmana (and eventually the Vyasa for the 24th Chatur-yuga).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

The Vedas teach that a sannyasi renounces his brahmana-thread when he takes sannyasa (sutra-sikha-tyaga, C.C.).

This is again incorrect. The practice of removing the hair and brahmana thread is a custom in the line of ekadanda sannyasa. This is not the case in other lines, such as the Sri Vaishnava line, wherein the tridanda sannyasa is accepted.

And last time I checked the Chaitanya Charitamrita was not part of the Vedas.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Initiation into krsna-mantra is a separate initiation which is only given to active Vaisnava brahmanas.

This entire article is filled with a misconception as to what is vaidika diksha and what is pancharatrika diksha. A thorough study of these two lines would be useful, otherwise one's attempt to appear scholarly makes one look foolish.

The Vaishnavas who accept vaidika diksha follow the vaikhanasa agamas. Those that accept pancharatrika diksha follow the pancharatra agamas. Their systems and procedures are completely different. To fail to acknowledge this difference leads one to make many mistakes.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Introducing varnasrama dharma, which is an institution of karma-yoga, is a namaparadha.

Varnashrama dharma is not an institution of karma-yoga. This is like saying all knives are murder weapons. Sripada Ramanuja considers varnashrama dharma to be much more than an institution of karma-yoga. Without having a proper conception of traditional vaishnava acharyas, one will never be able to understand the essence of vaishnava siddhanta. To think that vaishnavism means to just say "hare rama, hare rama" is the conception of a neophyte.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

11) Who is a sannyasi?

One who performs sat-nyasa is a sannyasi.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>A Vaisnava tyagi is not called sannyasi.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is false.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>In India a mayavadi is called sannyasi.

This is also false. The problem with many gaudiya-wanna-bes is that they don't have a clue as to what is anything. They just stamp everything as mayavada, a word which for most part, they cannot define. Then they go ahead and say "in India a mayavadi is called a sannyasi..." Where do you come up with this stuff? Now I'm beginning to wonder if _this author_ knows what the weather is like in India?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>In his Durgama-sangamani commentary on the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.113) Sri Jiva Gosvami sees a difference between a sannyasi and a Vaisnava-nivrtta (tyagi): sisyan naivanubadhniyad ityadiko yadyapi sannyasa-dharmas tathapi nivrttanam api bhaktanam upayujyata iti bhavah - "Just as it is wrong for a sannyasi to take too many disciples, so it counts also for renounced bhaktas."

There is a difference between a sannyasi, a babaji, and an avadhuta. A sannyasi is still following the varnashrama dharma. This topic is discussed in the fourth adhyaya of the Vedanta sutra. There are Vaishnavas who belong to each of these categories.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

There has never been a prohibition by the Gosvamis or the scriptures against calling householder-acaryas 'Gosvami'.

Gosvami is a titled applicable to anyone who has complete control of his senses, not to those engaging in illicit sex and other material activities.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

sadhu-sastra guru vakya, hrdaye koriya aikya - "The words of the guru must be compatible with the words of sadhu and sastra..."

No, that is not what this verse says. The correct translation is "Make the teachings of the guru, the sadhus, and the shastra one with your heart."

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>

Babajis are not sahajiyas, for sahajiyas are Saktas or Mayavadis who have tantric sex with other men's wives...

Again, this word 'mayavadi' pops up. The definition of sahajiya has no connection with either shaktas or mayavadis (advaitis).

Over all, this entire article is like a kindergarten presentation of the universe. Without any knowledge of vaishnavism beyond that which is practiced in Bengal, and with no knowledge of the greater vedic tradition, the author repeatedly opens his mouth only to reveal what he does not know.

Ananga · May 6, 2001

jijaji: Why are you wasting your breath on these lunatics? There is no point trying to reason with someone that is not capable of higher brain functions. That would be like trying to educate a chimpanzee at the university level.

Ananga · May 6, 2001

It boils down to plain common sense with regard to one's educational credentials. Sanskrit expertise is obviously going to be out of reach for most, however that does not excuse them from having good scholarship and educating rather than proselytizing in a bigoted way (which tends to be the norm with the orange pajama crowd). Everyone knows that those so-called preachers with their title of 'Maharaja' (where did that come from? Nobody in the mainstream Gaudiya community takes such a title.) always hire some scholar who knows what he is doing to translate and then they stamp their own name on the work with a claim of authorship (just out and out fraud). Who really translated the Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu that Bon Maharaja put his name on?

Gauracandra · May 6, 2001

Oh well, here we go again....

I didn't peg you, Ananga, as the "Jaya Sri Radhey" type but then again I haven't had much exposure to your postings. I thought we had a pretty cordial discussion a while back, but perhaps thats not indicative of your common standard....

Oh well, here's hoping to better discussions in the future. Take care.

Gauracandra

May 7, 2001

Quote:

___________

jijaji: Why are you wasting your breath on these lunatics? There is no point trying to reason with someone that is not capable of higher brain functions. That would be like trying to educate a chimpanzee at the university level.

_______________

Quote:

_____________

You may want to take my earlier advice on something called the brain, more seriously. It can help you rise above your school-boy logic. Prayer to Lord Gaur and Gauranga, thrice a day, may also help.

________

Quote:

______

Inside the head, there is something called a brain. If one starts using it, one can actually begin to understand such things. Perhaps it is time, for you to start doing so. It will be real helpful.

_______

Quote:

___________

It is SIMPLY IMPOSSIBLE for the BRAINWASHED

"KANISHTA CONSCIOUSNESS" to use the socalled 'brain'

for UNDERSTANDING "UTTAMA MAHA BHAGAVATA" and His Teachings.

Let the 'Preschooler' learn to count with the help of

BEADS,BLOCKS and DOLLS before speculating into WHAT is Calculus or Trigonometry.

_____________

Ananga · May 8, 2001

Gauracandra: My own standards are not really the issue, but rather those set by the past acaryas. Besides, this pathetic attempt here at refutation hardly carries any weight whatsoever. It does not address the question of heresy with regard to promotion of the siksa parampara concept, nor does it in any way invalidate the diksa lines that have come down to us intact over the past five centuries.

[This message has been edited by Ananga (edited 05-12-2001).]

Gauracandra · May 12, 2001

Personally I thought JNDas was very surgical in disproving the article, one point at at time. This idea of "becoming" a scholar is silly. Who will decide who is and who is not a scholar? If you can prove the article wrong thats proof enough for me. We are all intelligent individuals, and we can see based on logic, whether someone has proven their case. In this situation, there is no doubt JNDas did a very good job of rebutting the article. Take care.

Gauracandra

Ananga · May 13, 2001

If anyone thinks they are going to successfully refute the article cited, let them first become qualified scholars. Of course, once they do that, they will probably change their minds.

premananda · May 14, 2001

:-P

[This message has been edited by premananda (edited 05-27-2001).]

Gauracandra · May 14, 2001

1 ) Sri Kisori Mohana Gosvami and Sri Kisori Das Babaji witnessed that Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, when asked by Siddha Sri Ramakrsna das Pandit Baba in the early 1930s, declared that he was initiated in a dream.

The entire argument is based on rumors that cannot be substantiated. Well, I personally know that Langa Baba of Rishikesh heard that Kaupin Baba had been told by Sri Ramakrishna Das Pandit Baba that the moon is made of blue cheese. Go figure?

>>No it is not based on rumours. Sri Nitai Das personally heard from the Babaji who heard the actual conversation!

So in other words IT WAS BASED ON RUMORS. SOME NITAI DAS HEARD IT FROM SOME BABAJI WHO CLAIMS HE WAS SOMEWHERE AND HEARD IT. OK, then I was told by Dianne Feinstein that she heard George Bush admit he lost the election to Al Gore. Did you ever consider motive? Like maybe a Democratic senator claiming that a Republican President admitted losing an election to a Democratic candidate might not be real convincing. Jeez, is this all ya got. Weak. Very, very weak.

quote:

Sannyasa cannot be taken from a photo, without physical permission of the person on the photograph, but from a living sannyasi.

This presumes that it is not possible, while being situated in the stage of samadhi, to have a direct relationship with eternaly liberated souls.

>>That may be possible. But sannyasa should anyway be received from a sannyasi, babaji-vesa from a babaji.

Your opinion.

quote:

How can you wear saffron cloth while your would-be sannyasa guru wore white?

Like I said... their socks don't match, thats' proof they're wrong.

>>Would Sri Gaurkisora Das Babaji have given saffron cloth and sannyasa to his disciple? It seems very unlikely, because no Gaudiya Vaishnavas were tridanda sannyasis at that time. (OK, there might have been a couple, but it´s very rare.) It certainly was not the custom to wear saffron and danda!

Again, your opinion. “It seems very unlikely” you say which proves this is pure supposition on your part. Not very convincing. Then you say “No Gaudiya Vaishnavas were tridanda” and then switch positions to cover yourself by saying “Ok, there might have been a couple, but it’s very rare.” So in other words, you don’t know what you are saying. First you give your opinion, then you make a declarative statement, then you reverse that declarative statement. Ok, get back to me when you have made up your mind (by the way, have you since changed your position and acknowledged that Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu would not mind chanting the Holy names of God in front of the deities? I’d be curious on that flip flop as well.)

quote:

And saffron dhotis do not exist at all, only saffron bahirvasas (outer cloth) for Vedic eka-dandi (mayavadi) sannyasis and white dhotis for householders.

There are plenty of Vaishnava sannyasis who have taken ekadanda sannyasa. To assume that ekadanda sannyasa indicates that one is a mayavadi is a foolish conception and shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.

>>There are cases like that, but they are quite rare. But you must admit that most ekadanda-sannyasis are mayavadis.

He doesn’t have to admit anything. He has proven the prior statement to be foolish. JNDas is correct. The idea that eka-dandi sannyasis are mayavadis “shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.”

quote:

Grhasthas should not wear a kaupina (loincloth).

The kaupinam is meant to be worn by all people, begining from childhood. The iron kaupinam is not allowed to be worn by householders.

>>Kaupina refers to the type of cloth worn only by babajis and sannyasis here.

So you are saying that Kaupina is ONLY worn by babaji’s and sannyasis. First of all show me where it says the Kaupina is ONLY worn by babaji’s and sannyasis. What if I’m wearing one right now. Am I violating some Vedic injunction because I’m wearing a piece of cloth. Then show me where this is said. I think I need to quote JNDas yet again that this notion “shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.” Maybe in West Bengal only Babajis and Sannyasis wear a Kaupina (though you haven’t even shown that), but perhaps you should look at other traditions as well before you make such a statement, because clearly you are wrong.

quote:

Shaving the head is also only for sannyasis and not for others.

Every Vedic tradition has prescriptions for shaving the heads of the brahmacharis and brahmanas. The position of the shikha varies according to the lineage. In smarta lines the front of the head is shaved, and the remaining hair is tied into a large shikha. In Vaishnava lines the size and position of the shikha varies according to sampradaya and shaka.

>>Yes, but should grihasthas shave their head? I don´t think it matters. Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur would shave his head while being a grihastha for example.

How is shaving the head only for sannyasis. Suppose its really hot outside, and I like my head shaved because it nice and cool. Where is this idea that “Shaving the head is ONLY for sannyasis and not for others”. This is silly. Show me verse. Again, I have to quote JNDas that this notion “shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.” Maybe in West Bengal only Sannyasis shave their head, and now one else is allowed to (though you haven’t even shown that), but perhaps you should look at other traditions as well before you make such a statement, because clearly you are wrong.

quote:

suklavaso bhaven nityah

"One should always wear white clothe."

...or one's cloth should not be dirty.

Sukla doesn´t mean "not dirty", it means the color white.

quote:

...the ocean of samsara, which is hard to cross by yatis (mayavadi sannyasis)...

Yati does not mean "mayavadi sannyasi". This conception that everything else is "mayavadi" is very childish and displays a clear lack of understanding the various traditions. Sripada Ramanujacharya is also known as yati-raja, as are a number of Vaishnava saints.

>>In West Bengal a yati is generally a mayavadi sannyasi.

Here we go again with this West Bengal thing. “Oh in West Bengal a Yati is GENERALLY a mayavadi sannyasi”. Ok, so GENERALLY in one region of India, Yati refers to a mayavadi sannyasi. Back to quoting JNDas: this notion that Yati means mayavadi sannyasi “shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.” Maybe in West Bengal only mayavadi Sannyasis are called as Yati (though you haven’t even shown that), but perhaps you should look at other traditions as well before you make such a statement, because clearly you are wrong.

quote:

6) Where did Bhaktisiddhanta get his brahmana-thread from?

From that small shop in Navadvipa just next to Gauranga Brass Works on the road connecting to the ghata.

At least thats where I got mine.

>>That´s not even funny. What he asks is how he received brahmana initiation when he wasn´t born in a brahmana family.

Actually I thought it was rather funny.

quote:

This means that 2nd initiation is not the same as brahmana-initiation.

There is no such thing as a "second initiation" in vedic culture. There are three classifications of initiation, none go by the name "second initiation".

>>In ISKCON and GM there is a second initiation however, which is called >>"brahmana initiation".

>>The majority of Gaudiya Vaishnavas do not give the brahma-gayatri at the time of >>diksa. Only the vaishnava mantras are given, such as Gopala-mantra and Kama->>gayatri.

Note the word majority. Also not how he uses the word generally in his responses.

quote:

"Even the vultures will not eat the dead corpse of the ungrateful one who abandons the amnayagatam guru."

Yes, when the family traditions are preserved, the brahmanas and family gurus are to be respected. But in Kali yuga, when, according to the scriptures, the demons are born in brahmana families, and the caste guru's only business is sense gratification, it is advisable to reject such association in favour of a liberated soul.

>>"I feel sorry for all persons who are born in Sri Nityananda-vamsa. Because they are all materialists!"

>>What an offensive attitude. I would prefer taking diksa from a relative of Sri >>Nityananda Prabhu, if he was truly qualified. And the persons from the >>Nityananda-vamsa I have met were very learned and devotional.

>>What would make an ex-hippie more qualified than a Nityananda-vamsa Gosvami >>who is a true devotee? Perhaps that he ate cow meat before he became a >>devotee, or that he was a slave of beautiful women?

>>What I am trying to say here is that it is ridiculous to reject a Guru because he >>happens to be appear in a Prabhu-vamsa.

JNDas did not make any statement about Sri Nityananda-vamsa, you did. Of course you are trying to slip and slide to change what he said. Just like when you were claiming that Mahaprabhu would be against chanting Hare Krsna before the deities. Then when he proved you wrong, you tried to change the argument to “Why are you against me chanting softly”. This is childish. If this is the best you’ve got then just give it up because you aren’t fooling anyone.

quote:

What is the tilaka svarupa of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati and his followers?

In every vaishnava line there are variations of the tilak based on one's personal mood of surrender. Even within a single sampradaya there are many branches, each with a different tilak representing their process of sharanagati.

>>That was far out man! Is the tilaka based on one´s mood and surrender? No it is >>not. The tilakas of the particular parivaras are very specific.

Yawn.

quote:

In Hari-bhakti-vilasa (2.85) it is quoted: sampradayika mudradi bhusitam tam krtañjalim, "At the time of initiation the disciple receives the sectarian signs from the guru".

Traditional Vaishnava schools consider mudra to refer to shankha (conch), chakra (discus), gada (club) and padma (lotus), and these symbols should be marked on your body.

>>What is referred to here is the particular tilaka of the guruparampara.

Your point being? Yawn yet again… man am I getting sleepy.

quote:

Why did Bhaktisiddhanta not wear his guru's tilaka if he was really his disciple?

And why didn't saints like Shyamananda wear the tilak of their initiating gurus? This argument is not sound. Actually none of these arguments have any substance.

>>Shyamananda Prabhu was a nitya-siddha, Bhaktisiddhanta was not. That is a a big difference.

Your opinion. So you acknowledge that Jndas is correct YET AGAIN. Score another one for JNDas

quote:

a) In ISKCON/Gaudiya Matha we see everyone ultimately receiving brahmana-initiation. But which varnasrama-society has only brahmanas?

This question is like asking why do all universities create graduates when in society the majority of people are not graduates.

ISKCON and Gaudiya matha are spiritual organizations within the larger society of the world. It is natural for a spiritual organization to create spiritually focussed brahmanas. There are plenty of materialistic people in society, and we shouldn't expect spiritual institutions to have to create them as well.

>>Are you living in space or here among the human beings? So you seriously mean >>that everybody in ISKCON and GM are brahmananas? That does not explain, >>however, why the members of these organizations have different natures, from >>sudra up to brahmana.

All you are doing is criticizing with no basis. Everything is in a state of change. In 50 years there may be more structure to the Varnashram arrangement, but you are criticizing because “where is it right now”. Chill out.

quote:

...and, what to speak of knowing Sanskrit, the men don't even know Hindi or Bengali...

Nor Russian, nor chinese, nor sign language... I fail to see the spiritual significance of knowing Hindi, which has more connection to Muslim invaders than to the sages of ancient India.

>>Are you a new devotee? You fail to see the necessity of being able to read the >>original writings of the Gosvamis and the other scriptures if one claims to be >>Guru. For example, catolic and protestant priests candidates must study Greek >>and Latin to become qualified for priesthood. A Vaishnava Guru must know his >>scriptures too! That is one of the qualifications of a true Guru, knowledge of >>Scripture!

Srila Gaura Kisore Das Babaji was by materialistic standards illiterate but had pure devotion. There are a number of people who know Sanskrit who follow absolutely no religious regulations. Materialistic knowledge has no basis on spiritual understanding. One doesn’t have to know Sanskrit. Everyone likes to believe that only pure and noble things are written in Sanskrit. There are curse words in Sanskrit, and the equivalent of pornographic writings in Sanskrit. Again, materialistic knowledge has no basis on spiritual understanding.

quote:

...or even what the weather is like in India.

Here it is quite hot now. But the monsoon season will be starting soon. Everyone is looking forward to that. The guru's mercy is also like a monsoon cloud that extinguishes the forest fire of repeated birth and death. I wish more people would be looking forward to that monsoon.

quote:

Envy is the cause of the mentality: "Nowadays brahmanas are full of faults, so now we will launch our own varnasrama-system."

Spiritually speaking, the brahmanas are factually full of faults nowadays. In Orissa the brahmanas eat fish and drink liquor while continuing to pose as priests and family gurus. In South India, the brahmanas are not so bad, but they all virtually eat onion and garlic, drink tea and cofee, and work mostly as accountants and the such. Nowadays the younger generation has started eating eggs as well, on the grounds that they are "vegetarian". In some traditional holy places such as Udupi and Sri Rangam you can still find a few brahmanas who follow proper principles. In Udupi there is even a restaraunt(hotel) next to the Krishna Temple that cooks without onion and garlic and remains closed on Ekadashis. Such things are very rare though.

Regardless, the scriptures tell us that everyone is born a shudra, and by samskara they are elevated to the position of a brahmana. And elsewhere it is stated that in the age of Kali everyone is born a shudra.

Throughout the modern history of India, the brahmanas have greatly exploited the lower castes, to the point that they are now suffering the consequences of their actions.

Only a fool would think the glorification in the scriptures of brahmanas referred to the modern birth-based caste.

>>It seems like you know every brahmana in India.

Silly and childish. He didn’t say that. It is a fact that todays Brahmanas have factually let spiritual standards slide. There was an intern at my job who was Indian. I spoke to him and he told me he as a Brahman. Then I saw him eating hamburger at a company lunchout.

quote:

The Bhagavata (7.11.13) declares that a brahmana must first be born in a family that has always, throughout the generations, followed all the samskaras for brahmanas.

No, this verse does not say that. Samskaras are not only for brahmanas. There are samskaras for all varnas.

>>That is not what the text says. It says that a brahmana must be born in a >>brahmana family, otherwise he is no brahmana and can never become one. But >>hey, anybody can become an inhabitant of Goloka or Vaikuntha, cos it´s the >>nature of the soul!

Perhaps you didn’t notice two very famous and specific examples that prove you wrong yet again. Please read below the examples of Vishvamitra and Valmiki.

Regardless, there are countless examples of those belonging to other varnas acquiring the status of a brahmana. For example, Kaushika (Vishvamitra) was a Kshatriya, but by tapasya he became a brahma-rishi. Valmiki was a shudra, but by chanting the name of Rama he became a brahmana (and eventually the Vyasa for the 24th Chatur-yuga).

quote:

The Vedas teach that a sannyasi renounces his brahmana-thread when he takes sannyasa (sutra-sikha-tyaga, C.C.).

This is again incorrect. The practice of removing the hair and brahmana thread is a custom in the line of ekadanda sannyasa. This is not the case in other lines, such as the Sri Vaishnava line, wherein the tridanda sannyasa is accepted.

And last time I checked the Chaitanya Charitamrita was not part of the Vedas.

>>Has it occurred to you that the Caitanya Caritamrita includes many quotes from >>Vedic literature?

Has it occurred to you that the Caitanya Caritamrita is not part of the Vedas? I can’t believe you are making that statement. This is silly. JNDas is right again.

quote:

Initiation into krsna-mantra is a separate initiation which is only given to active Vaisnava brahmanas.

This entire article is filled with a misconception as to what is vaidika diksha and what is pancharatrika diksha. A thorough study of these two lines would be useful, otherwise one's attempt to appear scholarly makes one look foolish.

The Vaishnavas who accept vaidika diksha follow the vaikhanasa agamas. Those that accept pancharatrika diksha follow the pancharatra agamas. Their systems and procedures are completely different. To fail to acknowledge this difference leads one to make many mistakes.

quote:

Introducing varnasrama dharma, which is an institution of karma-yoga, is a namaparadha.

Varnashrama dharma is not an institution of karma-yoga. This is like saying all knives are murder weapons. Sripada Ramanuja considers varnashrama dharma to be much more than an institution of karma-yoga. Without having a proper conception of traditional vaishnava acharyas, one will never be able to understand the essence of vaishnava siddhanta. To think that vaishnavism means to just say "hare rama, hare rama" is the conception of a neophyte.

>>I don´t see how varnasrama-dharma can be a nama-aparadha. Of course if one >>forgets to chant the Holy Name due to focusing too much on varnasrama-dharma, >>then it might be "offensive".

Then lets always chant the holy name – even in front of the deities in harinam.

quote:

11) Who is a sannyasi?

One who performs sat-nyasa is a sannyasi.

quote:

A Vaisnava tyagi is not called sannyasi.

This is false.

>>A vaisnava-tyagi is called a babaji.

Ok, maybe I have to say it yet again: this notion that a vaisnava-tyagi is called a babaji “shows a lack of overall knowledge of the Vedic traditions.” Maybe in West Bengal only vaisnava-tyagis are called as babaji (though you haven’t even shown that), but perhaps you should look at other traditions as well before you make such a statement, because clearly you are wrong.

quote:

In India a mayavadi is called sannyasi.

This is also false. The problem with many gaudiya-wanna-bes is that they don't have a clue as to what is anything. They just stamp everything as mayavada, a word which for most part, they cannot define. Then they go ahead and say "in India a mayavadi is called a sannyasi..." Where do you come up with this stuff? Now I'm beginning to wonder if _this author_ knows what the weather is like in India?

>>You don´t understand that in West Bengal a sannyasi is not a Gaudiya Vaishnava renunciant. A sannyasi wears saffron cloth and danda, not babaji-vesa.

Here comes the whole West Bengal thing again. Yawn…

quote:

In his Durgama-sangamani commentary on the Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.2.113) Sri Jiva Gosvami sees a difference between a sannyasi and a Vaisnava-nivrtta (tyagi): sisyan naivanubadhniyad ityadiko yadyapi sannyasa-dharmas tathapi nivrttanam api bhaktanam upayujyata iti bhavah - "Just as it is wrong for a sannyasi to take too many disciples, so it counts also for renounced bhaktas."

There is a difference between a sannyasi, a babaji, and an avadhuta. A sannyasi is still following the varnashrama dharma. This topic is discussed in the fourth adhyaya of the Vedanta sutra. There are Vaishnavas who belong to each of these categories.

quote:

There has never been a prohibition by the Gosvamis or the scriptures against calling householder-acaryas 'Gosvami'.

Gosvami is a titled applicable to anyone who has complete control of his senses, not to those engaging in illicit sex and other material activities.

>> And if a Prabhu-vamsa Gosvami has control over his senses, then he may use >>the title Gosvami?

JNDas has clearly said that “anyone who has complete control of his senses, [and is not] engaging in illicit sex and other material activities” may be called a Gosvami. Where is the confusion?

quote:

sadhu-sastra guru vakya, hrdaye koriya aikya - "The words of the guru must be compatible with the words of sadhu and sastra..."

No, that is not what this verse says. The correct translation is "Make the teachings of the guru, the sadhus, and the shastra one with your heart."

>>And there should be no difference between what these three teach. This is often the case in ISKCON/GM though.

quote:

Babajis are not sahajiyas, for sahajiyas are Saktas or Mayavadis who have tantric sex with other men's wives...

Again, this word 'mayavadi' pops up. The definition of sahajiya has no connection with either shaktas or mayavadis (advaitis).

>>A sahajiya is not even a Vaishnava. A real sahajiya engages in many activities which are quite abominable. No true Gaudiya Vaishnava babaji would even think of performing such activities.

PD

A sahajiya is not even a Vaishnava – fine, but that was not JNDas’s point. He was showing this individuals lack of understanding of what a sahajiya is – because a “sahajiya has no connection with either shaktas or mayavadis (advaitis)”. Is this all clear now?

This article, which JNDas deconstructed surgically, is full of so many holes. JNDas, good job, but don’t waste your time on this silliness. I’ve spent too much answering this myself.

Gauracandra

[This message has been edited by Gauracandra (edited 05-30-2001).]

Jahnava Nitai Das · May 15, 2001

I won't waste much time on this reply, but I will just mention a couple obvious points that deserve to be stated.

Originally posted by premananda:

No it is not based on rumours. Sri Nitai Das personally heard from the Babaji who heard the actual conversation!

Nitai Das had a vendetta against Prabhupada because Prabhupada had him kicked out of ISKCON for deviant behavior.

The Babaji he heard from had a vendetta against Bhaktisiddhanta because Bhaktisiddhanta exposed the illicit activities of the false Babajis of Vrindavana.

To make it even more authoritative, Nitai Das (the author of the article) can't even remember the name of the Babaji he heard it from.

So what we have is this: A babaji who disliked Bhaktisiddhanta says Bhaktisiddhanta never actually received initiation. Another younger babaji who also didn't like Bhaktisiddhanta heard this, and 50 years later tells the same to Nitai Das (who also doesn't like Prabhupada/Bhaktisiddhanta). Nitai Das can't remember the name of this Babaji, but nevertheless he spreads it as an authoritative truth.

Is that called a rumor? I would think so.

Was there any motive behind spreading this rumor against their enemies? I would think so.

There are cases like that, but they are quite rare. But you must admit that most ekadanda-sannyasis are mayavadis.

Sri Chaitanya Himself accepted ekadanda sannyasa, as have countless Vaishnava Acharyas in other lines. Sannyasa is an order of life within the system of varnashrama dharma. What ever type of sannyasa was prominent and available at the time was generally accepted by the sadhus. Many of these personalities received bala-sannyasa while they were only 5 or 6 years old. It had nothing to do with which philosophy they followed.

Kaupina refers to the type of cloth worn only by babajis and sannyasis here.

No, you are wrong. 100 years ago everyone in India wore kaupinam. Maybe in the west it is an amazing and intriguing item of clothing, but here it isn't. Even today you will find farmers still wear it when working in the fields. Actually, they only wear it and nothing else. They have to stand in the hot sun all day, so they prefer to take off their outer garments and wear only kaupinam as they work. And yes, this includes Bengal and Orissa; as well as Tamil nadu. If one wears kaupinam, one is considered fully clothed.

Yes, but should grihasthas shave their head?

All Vaishnavas and Shaivites shave their head if they are strictly following the smriti shastras.

suklavaso bhaven nityah
"One should always wear white clothes."

<...or one's cloth should not be dirty.>

Sukla doesn´t mean "not dirty", it means the color white.

Thanks for pointing that out. I do know sanskrit, and I stand by my translation, with the exception that nitya refers to "daily" as in the usage "nitya-naimittika", which the Hari-bhakti-vilasa is called as ("nitya-naimittika-shastra").

Thus the verses states, "One should daily put on fresh and clean cloth."

The Hari-bhakti-vilasa states one should not wear torn cloth and one should daily wear white cloth. In a culture where everyone wears white clothe anyway, this indicates that the cloth should not be stained or dirty. This is a general rule, and not an absolute injunction. Sri Chaitanya's associates are describes as wearing many different colored dhoties in the kirtan party - blue, yellow, white, etc.

And since you are so particular on this verse, would you then apply it is a standard injunction for everyone? Should women also only wear white cloth? And if not why the sudden change? The fact is it is not a universal injunction.

In West Bengal a yati is generally a mayavadi sannyasi.

I have lived many years in West Bengal, and I can assure you that you are wrong.

Your first problem is you fail to understand what is a "mayavadi". However one defines "mayavadi" according to traditional means, "mayavadis" make up but a fraction of the sadhu community - either in Bengal or in other states of India.

This is why I say there must be a wider understanding of the greater Vedic tradition before these topics can be discussed. Without establishing the padarthas, communication is meaningless.

That was far out man! Is the tilaka based on one´s mood and surrender? No it is not. The tilakas of the particular parivaras are very specific.

Yes, the tilak is based on one's bhavam and process of sharanagati. I would suggest you undertake a more thorough study of this topic with reference to the change in tilaks between branches of various sampradayas.

--Traditional Vaishnava schools consider mudra to refer to shankha (conch), chakra (discus), gada (club) and padma (lotus), and these symbols should be marked on your body.--

What is referred to here is the particular tilaka of the guruparampara.

Are you certain? This verse from Hari-bhakti vilasa refers to the sampradaya's mudras, not to the parivars tilak. There are only four sampradayas in the Vaishnava line, and their mudras are the shanka, chakra, gada, and padma. The actual mudra is 'tapa'. It should be burnt into one's skin with an iron brand. But seeing that we are very adverse to sacrifice (and pain), the Goswami's have given us an easy alternative - gopi-chandana. I'm thankful for that.

You fail to see the necessity of being able to read the original writings of the Gosvamis and the other scriptures if one claims to be Guru.

I would suggest you undertake a thorough study of your own lineage and the texts written within it. Which texts by the Goswamis are written in Hindi? Which texts by the Goswamis are written in Bengali?

And as a side note, the present spoken bengali has very little similarity with medieval bengali, as is the case with the present Oriya and the medieval Oriya, and present Tamil and medieval Tamil. For example, most Tamils cannot understand the writings of the Alvhars. Nor can most Oriyans understand the writings of Jagannatha Das.

So even if one knew Bengali, he wouldn't be able to understand the non-existent Bengali books written by the Goswamis. The main reason is they are non-existent. The secondary reason is the language is different.

The Bhagavata (7.11.13) declares that a brahmana must first be born in a family that has always, throughout the generations, followed all the samskaras for brahmanas.

--No, this verse does not say that. Samskaras are not only for brahmanas. There are samskaras for all varnas--

That is not what the text says. It says that a brahmana must be born in a brahmana family, otherwise he is no brahmana and can never become one.

You are wrong. Your above claim makes me doubt your knowledge of sanskrit. Please prove me wrong. The verse you quote says nothing that you claim. It says one must come from a tradition where samskaras are performed. To show I am wrong and you are write, please post the verse with your break down of the contents. Then I can reply appropriately. Otherwise your claims, which are based on non-existent verse, can not be answered.

Here is a relevant point you didn't deal with:

Regardless, there are countless examples of those belonging to other varnas acquiring the status of a brahmana. For example, Kaushika (Vishvamitra) was a Kshatriya, but by tapasya he became a brahma-rishi. Valmiki was a shudra, but by chanting the name of Rama he became a brahmana (and eventually the Vyasa for the 24th Chatur-yuga).

--And last time I checked the Chaitanya Charitamrita was not part of the Vedas.--

Has it occurred to you that the Caitanya Caritamrita includes many quotes from Vedic literature?

The claim was that "the Vedas say..." and then he quotes a verse from Chaitanya-charitamrita. Please show me the verses from the Vedas that actually make the claimed statement, as the Chaitanya-charitamrita does not come within one of the Vedas. Please don't try to defend such a foolish point. When someone says the "Vedic literature", I can let it stretch. But when someone says "the Vedas", then it is specifically refering to the four Vedas. And last time I checked, the Chaitanya-charitamrita was not one of the four (though it is a very great text on spiritual life).

Another point to ponder:

This entire article is filled with a misconception as to what is vaidika diksha and what is pancharatrika diksha. A thorough study of these two lines would be useful, otherwise one's attempt to appear scholarly makes one look foolish.

The Vaishnavas who accept vaidika diksha follow the vaikhanasa agamas. Those that accept pancharatrika diksha follow the pancharatra agamas. Their systems and procedures are completely different. To fail to acknowledge this difference leads one to make many mistakes.

A vaisnava-tyagi is called a babaji.

No, this isn't acurate. A 'tyagi' is a renunciate. There are three main lines of renunciation, that of sannyasa, that of the babajis, and that of the avadhuta. There are Vaishnava saints and acharyas belonging to all the three lines. Thus Vaishnava-tyagi can refer to any of these three.

You don´t understand that in West Bengal a sannyasi is not a Gaudiya Vaishnava renunciant. A sannyasi wears saffron cloth and danda, not babaji-vesa.

I think you missed my answer:

There is a difference between a sannyasi, a babaji, and an avadhuta. A sannyasi is still following the varnashrama dharma. This topic is discussed in the fourth adhyaya of the Vedanta sutra. There are Vaishnavas who belong to each of these categories.

Jahnava Nitai Das · May 15, 2001

Originally posted by Ananga:

...nor does it in any way invalidate the diksa lines that have come down to us intact over the past five centuries.

Perhaps thats the difference between me and you. I am not interested in trying to invalidate your parampara. Follow it, chant Hare krishna, and be happy.

I have only posted a reply when my own parampara has been insulted.

Jahnava Nitai Das · May 15, 2001

Are you a new devotee?

No, actually I wouldn't consider myself a devotee at all. One day by the mercy of guru and Gauranga it may be possible.

Ananga · May 15, 2001

Gauracandra: Like the others you are just making excuses for yourself for not hitting the books. Why do you think the acaryas wrote so many treatises, and who do you think they were for? If you think the points in the article have been well-rebutted, then you just disappoint the rest of us that can clearly see that they have not. I am sorry if this offends you, but it is not a personal vendetta, just a matter of upholding longstanding traditions and teachings that many of us consider sacred.

Gauracandra · May 15, 2001

I'm sorry but I simply disagree that you have shown anything. Even simple things like singing Hare Krsna before the deities, we are told Mahaprabhu would disagree with this. This was clearly refuted. Now if you can't understand something this simple, then why should we conclude that you are correct on other issues. JNDas showed over and over again that the writer here lacks in many cases even a basic understanding of Vaisnava traditions. I'm sorry but you have not shown anything as far as I'm concerned.

Gauracandra

Ananga · May 16, 2001

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but then again what makes you so sure that you know anything about the knowledge of the author, that you are concluding that his points were so aptly refuted? Do you think you just might be mistaken about that?

Gauracandra · May 16, 2001

No I don't think I am mistaken and I'll explain why. One of the main problems with the author’s presentation is that he wants to appear authoritative, and as such continually makes exclusive statements to take on the air of authority. In so doing he makes repeated logical mistakes.

These mistakes take on the form of misidentifying a subset as the superset. This is really a basic logical fallacy that I personally learned in 6th grade geometry. Here is an example of what I mean:

All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

A rectangle, if I remember Mrs. Noah’s geometry lessons, is a 4 sided parallelogram made up of right angles.

A square is a 4 sided parallelogram made up of right angles, and with 4 equal sized sides.

Thus a square is a subset, of the superset of rectangles. All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.

Suppose someone were to tell me that they were far more advanced in mathematics than I and that my teachers didn’t know mathematics at all. They may say “I know Geometry, Trigonometry, Advanced Statistical analysis and Quantitative methods, I know more than you, so you should listen to me and not your teacher.” Now if someone were to say this, and then proceed to tell me that all rectangles are squares, and make continuous logical mistakes like all ellipses are circles, I would dismiss that individuals proclamations of the superiority of his knowledge.

The author of this article, wants to appear authoritative, but in the process simply appears foolish. He misidentifies his subset, limited experience of Vaisnava traditions, and assumes they are the superset. In the process, he only reveals his own lack of scholarship and analysis.

If you make such simple mistakes (to me the most blatant one being that Mahaprabhu would disagree with chanting the Holy Names of the Lord before the deities, found in another post) then why should I accept that you have such advanced knowledge? I don’t.

Gauracandra

premananda · May 17, 2001

jndas,

We will always disagree.

P D

Jahnava Nitai Das · May 17, 2001

Perhaps there will be some more general topics we can all agree on. This is one reason I prefer to avoid getting into spiritual details. The finer we go, the more chances there are for disagreement.

shvu · May 17, 2001

jndas,

We will always disagree.

P D

This is a paradox. If Jndas agrees with this statement, then it proves the statment false. If he disagrees, then it means there are some other point(s) that you both agree upon thus proving it false again.

Cheers

------------------

Confucious says, if you touch water, your hand will get wet.

amanpeter · May 17, 2001

------------------

Confucious says, if you touch water, your hand will get wet.

>>Unless, of course, you keep putting your FOOT in it...

------------------

Hare Krsna Hare Krsna

Krsna Krsna Hare Hare

Hare Rama Hare Rama

Rama Rama Hare Hare

Bhaktavasya · May 17, 2001

After reading this thread 2 days ago, I got a maha-headache, the likes of which I get once every few years. Eventually my entire body was in pain, and I just have to say (at the risk of getting cyber-yelled at) that whether Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati was initiated through the medium of a picture, a dream or another human doesn't matter to me. Also, whether 'we' are 'supposed to' wear white, orange, rainbow, or stripes is all external, the same with shaving the head, wearing no tilok or the design of your choice, positioning pictures of your gurus or teachers in order or having no pictures... and personally, many have been angry at 'Dad' (SP) and grand-dad (SBSS), but

due to their efforts we are all having these conversations, and slagging them too much is still hateful and hurtful to those who owe them gratitude. Enough, already.

Jagat · May 17, 2001

It's true. There's a lot of crap on both sides of this debate.

Jagat

Sukla does mean white. If the sastras wanted to say clean, they would have said "suddha" or "pavitra."

I never heard of a Vaishnava ever being called a yati in Bengal.

Tilak is the external symbol of the sampradaya/parivara in which one has been initiated and it is given at the time of initiation. This is agreed on by all, including the GM.

Of course Nitai is spreading rumors, but that is not his exclusive source of evidence.

Prabhupada did not kick Nitai out for any deviance. Nitai left of his own accord and was tarred and feathered in absentia afterwards.

I can assure you that Kisorikishorananda Das was too busily engaged in bhajan to be anything but ecstatic when he saw foreign Vaishnavas, whether they were wearing saffron or white.

Siddhanta Saraswati took sannyas from a picture. If you accept that it is authoritative, who am I to stop you? I am ready to accept that Saraswati Thakur created his own Vaishnava sampradaya on the basis of his understanding of the Goswami literature. On at least 99% of matters, Gaudiya Vaishnavas agree with the Gaudiya Math. There is no reason for the Gaudiya Math to be afraid of the truth -- in certain matters they differ from traditional Vaishnavism. They can and do consider this a bhushana, not a dushana. There is no reason that we cannot engage in friendly debate to establish whose ideas are closest to those of the Goswamis.

Saraswati Thakur may have had good reasons for wanting to establish a Daiva Varnashram society (I think it is a valid idea, myself), but it is quite erroneous to think that just because someone has taken Vaishnava initiation his social function is that of a Brahmin.

It is total confusion to mix the category of Vaishnava with Brahmin. One should respect a Vaishnava more than a Brahmin no matter what his caste. That does not mean that the Brahminical functions of teacher, priest and minister should be performed by untrained Vaishnavas simply because they have received initiation. This does a disservice to the idea of Daiva Varnashram.

While I am at it, the idea that people should be trained as kshatriyas to manage Iskcon is also kind of laughable. Iskcon should be a society of Brahmins, and Brahmins with managerial ability should run it. They should be trained as Brahmins first and in management if necessary, but to "train them as kshatriyas" is ridiculous.

Christianity dealt with uneducated people desiring to lead renounced religous lives by making them "lay brothers." They could participate in all religious activities, and were certainly not hampered in reaching a high level of spirituality, but they were never considered socially the equals of the educated priests or monks.

As a matter of fact, we have an example here in Montreal. Anyone who has been to Montreal has probably seen St. Joseph's Oratory, a huge church on the north flank of Mount Royal. This church was built by Frère André, a lay brother of the Sacred Cross Order. He had a grade four education, I believe, and his job was to be the gatekeeper at Collège Notre-Dame.

Somehow, to the embarrassment of his priestly godbrothers, his reputation as a holy man started to spread and people kept coming to the Collège to get healed. Frère André had a dream to build a chapel on the mountain and this was realized through the aid of grateful people he had helped. Later the big Oratory was constructed.

Many of the Babajis are uneducated, this is true. Not all, but many. But the Babajis never functioned as a priestly class, so it is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

So I think that Saraswati Thakur was somewhat justified in trying to establish clarity and order in the Varnashram system. For Westerners, establishing the Varnashram Dharma has a different meaning, however.

Iskcon and any other Vaishnava organization established in the West has to create viable lay communities. This can only be done by placing spiritual value on occupational duties. Iskcon has become a hollow shell in most major North American cities because it totally devalued people working according to their guna and karma and contributing the results of their labor to the service of Krishna. Preaching has been exclusively geared to renunciation, even for those who are not prepared for it.

Whether these things are important or not is another question.

Maitreya · May 17, 2001

Originally posted by Jagat:

Iskcon and any other Vaishnava organization established in the West has to create viable lay communities. This can only be done by placing spiritual value on occupational duties. Iskcon has become a hollow shell in most major North American cities because it totally devalued people working according to their guna and karma and contributing the results of their labor to the service of Krishna. Preaching has been exclusively geared to renunciation, even for those who are not prepared for it.

Whether these things are important or not is another question.

This is what Siddhasvarupa has been doing for decades.Out of any group a few brahmins will emerge naturally.Most will be better off maintaining an occupation to support those brahmins in their teaching/preaching efforts.

Some points on the article fom Bhajana Kutir website

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads