Who is Srila Prabhupada?

[Shashi]

Originally posted by suryaz:

Good night Beemasane and good night gHari.

I need to prepare the evening prasad now.

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 03-30-2002).]

In our culture bhoga is becoming prasad only after Lord is accepting it. So how is Smt Suryaz can prepare the evening prasad? Is it she is keeping Lord in the kitchen and commanding him to accept her cookery?

 

 

[gHari]

Whatever words were used or misused, I'll bet Krsna enjoyed the love and the food offered to Him.

 

[This message has been edited by gHari (edited 03-30-2002).]

[Shashi]

Originally posted by gHari:

Whatever words were used or misused, I'll bet Krsna enjoyed the love and the food offered to Him.

 

[This message has been edited by gHari (edited 03-30-2002).]

 

Sorry prabhuji but I am not able to bet with you. our family Guruji having prohibited the gambling as well as meating and intoxicating and unmarried loving.

 

[Jagat]

I have a lot of trouble with gender neutral pronouns. Actually Bengali does have gender neutral pronouns, but English does not.

 

I have heard all kinds of proposals about how to render English gender neutral, but have yet to find a satisfactory one. To me, they all sound like very awkward English.

 

(1) One solution proposes using plural "they" instead of "he", arguing that numerical error is preferable to gender error.

 

(2) Another is the use of "one" as a gender neutral pronoun. Just write a few sentences that way and see what it sounds like. "One" as a referent to an ambiguous noun is very jarring. "The sadhaka eats one's food."

 

(3) Another solution is to mix up or alternate "he" and "she" which, as gHari observed, sounds weird. Though, in HNC, Bhaktivinoda Thakur writes "sadhaka" (male) for the practitioner in the sadhaka-deha and "sadhika" (female) for the practitioner in the siddha-deha.

 

(4) Another solution is to do, as the French have had a tendency to do here, say "he or she", "him or her", etc. I do that from time to time and could do so here, but to do so consistently is an abuse of the English language's natural concision.

 

Gender bias exists in Sanskrit as well, where as in French, Latin, etc., the plural of any mixed gender group is always in the masculine. The problem is balanced out in other ways, for instance, in French "personne" (a person) "votre majesté" (your majesty), etc. are feminine, so if you use those words you have to continue with feminine pronouns, even if the person or king in question is a male.

 

The only elegant solution to the gender neutral pronoun problem would be to create an entirely new pronoun, but I have seen no serious effort in this direction.

 

I must admit that on the whole, I am a bit prejudiced in favor of general usage and don't see why

 

If you can help me out with suggestions, Suryaz, I welcome them.

 

Jagat

[stonehearted]

Originally posted by Jagat:

I have a lot of trouble with gender neutral pronouns. Actually Bengali does have gender neutral pronouns, but English does not.

 

I have heard all kinds of proposals about how to render English gender neutral, but have yet to find a satisfactory one. To me, they all sound like very awkward English.

 

(1) One solution proposes using plural "they" instead of "he", arguing that numerical error is preferable to gender error.

 

(2) Another is the use of "one" as a gender neutral pronoun. Just write a few sentences that way and see what it sounds like. "One" as a referent to an ambiguous noun is very jarring. "The sadhaka eats one's food."

 

(3) Another solution is to mix up or alternate "he" and "she" which, as gHari observed, sounds weird. Though, in HNC, Bhaktivinoda Thakur writes "sadhaka" (male) for the practitioner in the sadhaka-deha and "sadhika" (female) for the practitioner in the siddha-deha.

 

(4) Another solution is to do, as the French have had a tendency to do here, say "he or she", "him or her", etc. I do that from time to time and could do so here, but to do so consistently is an abuse of the English language's natural concision.

 

The only elegant solution to the gender neutral pronoun problem would be to create an entirely new pronoun, but I have seen no serious effort in this direction.

 

This has actually become an exercise in audience awareness as much as anything else. Over the last 30 or so years, the bias in the general use of masculine pronouns (and other usages as well, but the pronoun problem is what suryaz brought up) has been called to public attention by feminist academics. Writing instructors have sytematically called thier students' attention to this and the range of possible solutions. The use of "they" and "their" is seen by some as a numer-agreement error, but it actually has a rather prestigious usage pedigree, including Shakespeare and Shaw. I have some citations, but they're in a box somewhere (we're not settled yet).

 

The use of "one," as Jagadananada prabhu points out, can be very awkward; I know of an ISKCON sannyasi who uses "one" incessantly, and it drives me nuts. Random switching or alternating the gender of pronouns for indeterminate referents is used by some academics in their writing, but it can be unsettling to many readers. (Some academics also use consistently feminine pronouns; I've tried it, and it can either feel phony or, if you approach it as turning the convention on its head, can be fun.) In the case of Bhaktivinoda's writing, I wonder if gHari was referring to was more like what Jagat mentions, where the male sadhaka becomes feminine on receiving (or being told of) a female siddha deha.

 

Occasionally using "him or her" or "hs or hers" often works fairly well, especially for students who, as many of mine do, have trouble keeping pronouns and their antecedents straight. However, I agree with Jagat that it undermines the English language's elegance.

 

There have been attempts to introduce gender-neutral pronouns in the campaign for gender equity in the language, but not one has caught on. One such attempt was "s/he," which has a bunch of problems (how do you pronounce it?).

 

Although I don't know Sanskrit and Bengali nearly as well as Jagat, but I know they have neuter nouns. English nouns aren't inherently gendered, as are those in Sanskrit and English, as well as French, Spanish, and other languages, But Sanskrit (and Bengali, too?) has masculine, feminine, and neuter nouns. My sense is that they use neuter pronouns for neuter antecedents. Jagat?

 

One solution for the book may to include a note at the beginning explaining your discomfort with the solutions and your desire to maintain the highest possible fidelity to the original. That would acknowledge those readers who might find your usage off-putting, as suryaz did.

 

Babhru

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by stonehearted (edited 03-30-2002).]

[gHari]

I think the solution is to use feminine pronouns.

 

Then when one realizes that the text no longer draws him into the spirit of the piece as much, they will change the "hers" into "theirs" or nouns or some other creative construct. Of course as mentioned, one cannot simply search and replace, for at times ambiguity will arise.

 

I must agree that all solutions still feel contrived, but for effective communication in maximizing the reach to jivas currently covered with feminine material characteristics, the price is negligible. This becomes very clear when the shoe is on the other foot.

 

There are the other cases in which we don't know the gender of the subject. We seem to get away with 'it' when referring to animals, but calling an unborn child 'it' will definitely not endear one to the mother.

 

In reality, perhaps the use of the singular inaccurate pronoun is just sometimes incorrect English usage - the slothful use of a pronoun where a noun is required. As Jagat points out, all solutions are inaccurate. However, at least faulting numerically, the reader can plainly see the error and eventually as it has for me, it will become the new language usage standard that 'they' is either plural or neutral singular.

 

If we really think about it, since the pronoun can be referring to both males and females, it is really plural, and so is the noun, even though the usage is singular. "The sadhaka experiences their svarupa when Krsna reveals His original three-fold bending form of Syamasundara." Here we actually expect many sadhakas, and indeed sadhakas in general to experience the same result. The sentence is really saying "All sadhakas will experience the sadhaka's svarupa when Krsna reveals His original three-fold bending form of Syamasundara." Therefore "they" is much more accurate than "he" or "she", although as pointed out in the book, "he" turning into "she" has a certain scary truth to it too.

 

And somehow this all has a lot to do with our becoming firmly situated in our eternal role within the divine pastimes of Sri Sri Radha-Krsna.

 

 

This is interesting, from the American Heritage Dictionary:

they (th³) pron. 1. Used to refer to the ones previously mentioned or implied. 2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to the one previously mentioned or implied, especially as a substitute for generic he: Every person has rights under the law, but they don't always know them. See Usage Note at he1. 3.a. Used to refer to people in general. b. Used to refer to people in general as seen in a position of authority. [Middle English, from Old Norse their, masculine pl. demonstrative and personal pron.. See to- below.]

 

he 1 (h¶) pron. 1.a. Used to refer to the man or boy previously mentioned or implied. b. Used to refer to a male animal. 2. Usage Problem. Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown: “He who desires but acts not, breeds pestilence” (William Blake). --he n. A male person or animal: Is the cat a he? [Middle English, from Old English h¶. See ko- below.]

 

USAGE NOTE: Traditionally, English speakers have used the pronouns he, him, and his generically in contexts in which the grammatical form of the antecedent requires a singular pronoun, as in Every member of Congress is answerable to his constituents; A novelist should write about what he knows best; No one seems to take any pride in his work anymore, and so on. Beginning early in the 20th century, however, the traditional usage has come under increasing criticism for reflecting and perpetuating gender discrimination. · Defenders of the traditional usage have argued that the masculine pronouns he, his, and him can be used generically to refer to men and women. This analysis of the generic use of he is linguistically doubtful. If he were truly a gender-neutral form, we would expect that it could be used to refer to the members of any group containing both men and women. But in fact the English masculine form is an odd choice when it refers to a female member of such a group. There is something plainly disconcerting about sentences such as Each of the stars of It Happened One Night [i.e., Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert] won an Academy Award for his performance. In this case, the use of his forces the reader to envision a single male who stands as the representative member of the group, a picture that is at odds with the image that comes to mind when we picture the stars of It Happened One Night. Thus he is not really a gender-neutral pronoun; rather, it refers to a male who is to be taken as the representative member of the group referred to by its antecedent. The traditional usage, then, is not simply a grammatical convention; it also suggests a particular pattern of thought. · Many writers sidestep the problem by avoiding the relevant constructions. In place of Every student handed in his assignment, they write All the students handed in their assignments; in place of A taxpayer must appear for his hearing in person, they write Taxpayers must appear for their hearings in person, and so on. Even when using the relevant constructions, however, many writers never use masculine pronouns as generics. In a series of sample sentences such as A patient who doesn't accurately report Ÿ sexual history to the doctor runs the risk of misdiagnosis, an average of 46 percent of the Usage Panel chose a coordinate form (her/his, his or her, and so on), 3 percent chose the plural pronoun (although the actual frequency of the plural in writing is far higher than this number would suggest), 2 percent chose the feminine pronoun, another 2 percent chose an indefinite or a definite article, and 7 percent gave no response or felt that no pronoun was needed to complete the sentence. · As a substitute for coordinate forms such as his/her or her and his, third person plural forms, such as their, have a good deal to recommend them: they are admirably brief and entirely colloquial and may be the only sensible choice in informal style; for example, in the radio commercial that says “Make someone happy—give them a goosedown Christmas,” where him would be misleading and her or him would be fussy. At least one major British publisher has recently adopted this usage for its learners' dictionaries, where one may read such sentences as If someone says they are “winging it,” they mean that they are improvising their way. But in formal style, this option is perhaps less risky for a publisher of reference books than for an individual writer, who may be misconstrued as being careless or ignorant rather than attuned to the various grammatical and political nuances of the use of the masculine pronoun as generic pronoun. What is more, this solution ignores a persistent intuition that expressions such as everyone and each student should in fact be treated as grammatically singular. Writers who are concerned about avoiding both grammatical and social problems are best advised to use coordinate forms such as his or her. · Some writers see no need to use a personal pronoun implying gender unless absolutely necessary; in the sample sentence A child who develops this sort of rash on Ÿ hands should probably be kept at home for a couple of days, 6 percent of the Usage Panel completed the sentence with the. In addition, some writers have proposed other solutions to the use of he as a generic pronoun, such as the introduction of wholly new gender-neutral pronouns like s/he or hiser, or the switching between feminine and masculine forms in alternating sentences, paragraphs, or chapters. · In contrast to these innovations, many writers use the masculine pronoun as generic in all cases. For the same series of sample sentences, the average percentage of Usage Panel members who consistently completed the sentences with his was 37. This course is grammatically unexceptionable, but the writer who follows it must be prepared to incur the displeasure of readers who regard this pattern as a mark of insensitivity or gender discrimination.

<font color="#dedfdf">

 

[This message has been edited by gHari (edited 03-30-2002).]

[stonehearted]

Originally posted by gHari:

I think the solution is to use feminine pronouns.

stone: I think that, in terms of the ultimate siddhant ao four sampradaya, this has a wonderful logic. As I mentioned before, I also found it fun as a way to turn a convention on its head, or as gHari says, to put the shoe on the other foot. In practical terms, it's a way to alienate yet another part of an audience. I thought of the group referred to as GHQ among ISKCON devotees--some devotees who seem to many to think they are men.

 

In reality, perhaps the use of the singular inaccurate pronoun is just sometimes incorrect English usage - the slothful use of a pronoun where a noun is required.

Yes, and this is where my students often have touble. There's also another problem: the slothful avoidance of pronouns, which, as we saw in the sample from Kusakrata's translation, can also create awkward prose.

 

If we really think about it, since the pronoun can be referring to both males and females, it is really plural, and so is the noun, even though the usage is singular. "The sadhaka experiences their svarupa when Krsna reveals His original three-fold bending form of Syamasundara." Here we actually expect many sadhakas, and indeed sadhakas in general to experience the same result. The sentence is really saying "All sadhakas will experience the sadhaka's svarupa when Krsna reveals His original three-fold bending form of Syamasundara." Therefore "they" is much more accurate than "he" or "she", although as pointed out in the book, "he" turning into "she" has a certain scary truth to it too.

Another common solution, then, is to use plural constructions when it's not too awkward or inaccurate to do so: "The sadhakas experience their svarupa when Krsna reveals His original three-fold bending form of Syamasundara."

 

Thanks, gHari for the usage notes from the American Heritage dictionary. Of the several dictionaries I use, it's the one I use most frequently because I like the usage notes. I have several other books I use for usage, which, as I have noted aren't particularly useful at the moment becuase they're packed away.

 

Babhru

 

[This message has been edited by stonehearted (edited 03-30-2002).]

[beemasane]

Dear gHari, you are indeed a most soft-hearted and pliable chap(?) to "tinge" this new thread slant "Who is Prabhupada" with Bhakti. commendable effort...and who i am i to not go with the "flo"? Bhimasane. i have an overnight houseguest who just happens to be a distant relative who has a purport to support your very valid observation that this topic indeed has everything to do with our eternal relationship with divine pastimes. and now without further ado, straight from the catskills my cousin kinntukkey bab(a) temple commander of the "jimminy baba third elbow retreat" with a devilishly clever bit of cunning hokum and congenial flimm-flamm-ery from the down-home annals of Th' jimminy bab' hisself...good ol' kintukkey bab(a)..."'hossafat yew all...GUYS: tie yer yangeroo down sport! GALS: keep yer yin up 'acuzzin thetthere's really where its at. and both you gals guys 'n' remember what ol' jimminy bab' hisself usta' say: 'remember, wherever yew go, there ya' is.'".

 

[This message has been edited by beemasane (edited 03-30-2002).]

[beemasane]

after guru pujaprayers in L.A...1975. Srila Prabhupada had handed out treats to all of the kids and then was giving treats, then fruit to all of some big devotees up near the vyasasana when he came to big Brahmananda...he had nothing left...big Brahmananda got this real overly sad face and hung his head with his lower lip sticking out and was pouting...so Prabhupada atarts looking at devotees, looking at the empty baskets...now i'm not sure about where it came from, if memory serves me correct it was from inside the side-arm of the vyasasana...well, anyways, he comes up with an apple somehow and gives it to big Brahmananda who gets this big satisfied look on his face, all to the cheers of the assembled devotees. Hari Bol! Jaya Prabhpada!

[Shashi]

Originally posted by Jagat:

The only elegant solution to the gender neutral pronoun problem would be to create an entirely new pronoun, but I have seen no serious effort in this direction.

 

 

If you can help me out with suggestions, Suryaz, I welcome them.

 

Jagat

Oh Jagatji what about the word IT to be also covering the persons? My younger brother is suggesting a variety to it as ET.

[beemasane]

Em. trust me, Em. Emmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm! See? it also spells me backwards, a nice little touch. that combined with the inherent omkara sound and...Ding!...i think we got a WINNER!

 

[This message has been edited by beemasane (edited 03-30-2002).]

 

[This message has been edited by beemasane (edited 03-30-2002).]

[beemasane]

ever notice that in that old New York film footage where this guy is filming right in front of Prabhupada with the camera up close, i mean real close and Srila Prabhupada looks right into the camera and it looks like he's looking right AT you?

[gHari]

Excerpt from The Nectar of Devotion 16:

Eligibility for Spontaneous Devotional Service

 

Persons desiring to follow in the footsteps of such eternal devotees of the Lord as the VRSNis and VRndAvana denizens are called rAgAnugA devotees, which means that they are trying to attain to the perfection of those devotees. These rAgAnugA devotees do not follow the regulative principles of devotional service very strictly, but by spontaneous nature they become attracted to some of the eternal devotees such as Nanda or YazodA, and they try to follow in their footsteps spontaneously. There is a gradual development of the ambition to become like a particular devotee, and this activity is called rAgAnugA.

 

We must always remember, however, that such eagerness to follow in the footsteps of the denizens of Vraja (VRndAvana) is not possible unless one is freed from material contamination. In following the regulative principles of devotional service, there is a stage called anartha-nivRtti, which means the disappearance of all material contamination. Sometimes someone is found imitating such devotional love, but factually he is not freed from anarthas, or unwanted habits. It has been seen that a so-called devotee proclaims himself a follower of Nanda, YazodA or the gopIs, while at the same time his abominable attraction for mundane sex life is visible. Such a manifestation of divine love is mere imitation and has no value. When one is actually spontaneously attracted to the loving principles of the gopIs, there will be found no trace of any mundane contamination in his character.

 

Therefore, in the beginning, everyone should strictly follow the regulative principles of devotional service, according to the injunctions of the scriptures and the spiritual master. Only after the stage of liberation from material contamination can one actually aspire to follow in the footsteps of the devotees in VRndAvana.

 

It is said by SrI RUpa GosvAmI, "When one is actually liberated from material contamination, he can always remember an eternal devotee in VRndAvana in order to love KRSNa in the same capacity. And developing such an aptitude, one will always live in VRndAvana, even within his mind." The purport is that if it is possible one should go and physically be present at VrajabhUmi, VRndAvana, and be engaged always in the service of the Lord, following the devotees in Vraja-dhAma, the spiritual realm of Vraja. If it is not possible, however, to be physically present at VRndAvana, one can meditate anywhere upon living in that situation. Wherever he may be, one must always think about life in Vraja-dhAma and about following in the footsteps of a particular devotee in the service of the Lord.

 

A devotee who is actually advanced in KRSNa consciousness, who is constantly engaged in devotional service, should not manifest himself, even though he has attained perfection. The idea is that he should always continue to act as a neophyte devotee as long as his material body is there. Activities in devotional service under regulative principles must be followed even by the pure devotee. But when he realizes his actual position in relationship with the Lord, he can, along with the discharging of regulative service, think within himself of the Lord, under the guidance of a particular associate of the Lord, and develop his transcendental sentiments in following that associate.

 

[suryaz]

If you can help me out with suggestions, Suryaz, I welcome them.

 

Jagat

 

Jagat,

 

Your translation:

 

"When on examining the disciple’s natural tendencies, the spiritual master verifies that he truly has a taste for serving in the sringara-rasa, he informs the disciple of the eternal form that he should cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's sub-group of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis."

 

Alternatives:

 

 

"When on examining the disciple’s natural tendencies, the spiritual master verifies that” [he/she] -or put- [the disciple] “truly has a taste for serving in the sringara-rasa” [the spiritual master then] “informs the disciple of the eternal form that” [he/she] “should cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's sub-group of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis."

 

"When on examining the disciple’s natural tendencies, the spiritual master verifies that” [the disciple] “truly has a taste for serving in the sringara-rasa” [the spiritual master then] “informs the [individual] of the eternal form…” [he/she] “should cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's sub-group of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis."

 

My preferences are:

 

 

Upon "examining the natural tendencies of the disciple the spiritual master" confirms whether the disciple "truly has a taste for serving in sringara-rasa." If a positive confirmation is verified, the spiritual master "informs the disciple of the eternal form" he/she "should cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's" branch "of Srimati Radharani’s” gopi camp

 

 

or

 

 

Upon "examining the natural tendencies of the disciple the spiritual master" confirms whether the disciple "truly has a taste for serving in sringara-rasa." If eligibility is verified, the spiritual master "informs the disciple of the eternal form" he/she "should cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's" branch "of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis."

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 03-31-2002).]

[suryaz]

Originally posted by gHari:

Whatever words were used or misused, I'll bet Krsna enjoyed the love and the food offered to Him.

 

).]

Thank you gHari,

 

You are very kind

 

 

I also hope the food offered was enjoyed

 

i.e., I hope it became prasad

 

[suryaz]

 

Originally posted by Shashi:

 

Sorry prabhuji but I am not able to bet with you. our family Guruji having prohibited the gambling as well as meating and intoxicating and unmarried loving.

 

Well Shashi I can ask:

 

Could your judgment not be based on a gamble????

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 03-31-2002).]

[gHari]

If eligibility is verified, the spiritual master reveals the disciple's eternal form to be cultivated as a manjari in Lalita's branch of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis.

 

[suryaz]

Originally posted by gHari:

If eligibility is verified, the spiritual master reveals the disciple's eternal form to be cultivated as a manjari in Lalita's branch of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis.

 

Or maybe

 

If eligibility is verified, the spiritual master reveals the eternal form the disciple is to cultivate as a manjari in Lalita's branch of Srimati Radharani’s group of gopis

 

[Jagat]

Thanks for the suggestions. I will consider them as I go through the final draft.

[Shashi]

Originally posted by suryaz:

Well Shashi I can ask:

 

Could your judgment not be based on a gamble????

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 03-31-2002).]

 

When it is coming to the question of who is Srila Prabhupad my judgement is being that when it is comes to the Gurus Prabhupad is IT. Mataji Suryaz I make emphasise there is not being any gambling in this judgement. When you are coming foolly upon the Hindu parthways you will be understanding why SP is IT. This way IT is not being anymore the impersnal pronoun.

 

 

[sha]

Originally posted by gHari:

Excerpt from The Nectar of Devotion 16:

Topic: Eligibility for Raganuga Bhakti

 

http://www.indiadivine.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000293.html

 

[suryaz]

Originally posted by Jagat:

Thanks for the suggestions...

Hummm !! OK... but...

 

Jagat,

 

The pleasure of assistance was ours.

 

 

And now as our soul brother, I hope you will forgive us for reminding you of what you already knew.

 

Your soul sister in Divine service.