Vipramukhya Swami quits

[theist]

Two way street for sure mahak.Krsna is awarding our desires.

[ethos]

Brajamandala, your defense of Vipramukhya was full of personal empathy. I'm happy to hear such sensitive words.

 

But what about duty? He made the decision to accept the renounced order knowing full well what it entailed. I guess he successfully practiced it for many, many years. Why couldn't he just finnish what he started? It seems to me he just personally gave up and opted for some stimulation. Yes, sometimes we fail and I certainly can't speak for his personal demons or circumstance. But why didn't he just put aside his troubles and fulfill his obligations, even if it meant resigning himself to unhappiness?

 

These big leaders who fall hurt alot of intimate associates and create alot of political damage when it is seen that they can't practice what they preach. That's the bigger issue if only by the numbers. Outsiders especially, probably view Krsna consciousness as some cheap show when the people at the top opt for common sense gratification. This is extremely detrimental to ourselves and those we wish to impress with the highest truth.

 

He probably preached duty over desire most of his life - only to surrender.

[brajamandala]

EthosPrabhu ,who saidit's his desire, do you know the whole scenario. He took on his duty with good faith, he had a go, we can only work with what's in our hand. We don't know what's ahead. He did his duty for a long time and I'm not saying his duty in a meagre way. He would know the PR outcome of such a move. Yur post immediatley reminded me of the scenario of Arjuna on the battlefield. Arjuna asyou know was overwhelmed by "emotion", just like Swami Vipramukhya probably is/was. It doesn'matter what flavour the emotion has, the fact is that if Krsna wasn't there to instruct, and by the sound of it, it took some doin, Arjuna wouldn't be able to fulfil his duty.

This Swami did not have the Supreme Personality of Godheadin person standing theretelling him to get off his butt put his woes behind and just carry on. Easy to say Prabhu, just to carry on with his duty regardless. Have you ever been in such a heavy predictament yourself. Give the guy some credit.

[ethos]

Brahmamandala, action originates as desire. The reason people do anything is because they think they should do it.

 

One could use your arguments against anything that invloves commitment or inconvienience: "I can't chant my rounds" or "I'll abort my baby" or "I just can't help myself." I think that's the whole guist behind "I did it but I'm not responsible."

 

Some people will follow through, some won't. He obviously got tired and gave up. I think if Prabhupada had been around (as in your Arjuna example), he probably wouldn't have fallen. He did function for more than a quarter century and no one can take that from him. On the other hand, I think it makes the fall greater.

 

I don't know the whole scenario and I might think different if I did.

 

But I do know philosophically, that these kinds of falls can jeapordize the entire institution as evidenced by the many Rtvik complaints. I'm not a Rtvik proponent, but I can understand how their faith has been compromised. If the pillars of society fail, then everything based on them fail also. It's a domino effect that can invlolve alot of people. It's a serious philosophical issue that lies at the heart of our religious and social science.

 

It is much bigger than the sum of it's parts!

[theist]

Just to go in a different direction a bit.We can see the lessons being taught as these dramas play out externally to our lives.But can we see them as they play out within our own pysches?

 

It does not take a long look within, to see my mind is housing the desire to be be seen as some type of guru.I pretend to know that which I don't,and yet try to keep up the facade to others that I do.False guru syndrome?

 

Sometimes I wonder if the events in the outer world aren't really some kind of parable pointing to what is happening within.

 

Just thinking out loud.

[ethos]

Ditto that Theist. That's a nice bunch of words.

 

Anyway, I have my faults and I'm certainly not qualified to dwell on Vipramukhya's. Still the matter of duty and institutional consequences should be gravely examined.

 

My conscience is satisfied now that I barked my warning of maya's prescence. I won't be pursuing this again ..that is, until the next swami falls.

[brajamandala]

Dear Thos,

I take your points on board, I'm not using my points as justification for anything. I realize action originates in desire, but as you go along desires change. He may not have had much of a worldly desire when he started, hence his enthusiasm to take sannyasi cloth with gusto and do his duty as a spiritual leader. I just feel for those who are willing to take that kind of heavy responsibility in the first place. So many who maybe oculd stand up and be counted do not take it on because of all sorts of fears. He responded to the challenge and took it as far as he could. That's just the way I see it.

 

There maybe some gurus around who feel the same way as this swami but will never come clean because they fear dishonour and poverty, they're use to the "high life". I've witnessed the personal torment a swami goes through long before he falls, his words, his body langage, his mood, his frustration and anger . It's just very sad and that's all I've got to say about it..

 

And as far as Mahak suggesting let the Supersoul guide naturally, I think many don't even know the supersoul in reality let alone be guided by Him. I think their false egos guide them more, especially when there is a bit of pratistha to be had, instead of chosen, they end up choosing themselves and promoting themselves so subtly they fool their soon to be followers into thinking they're the naturally effulgent chosen one.

 

[Jagat]

manuSyAH pArtha sarvazaH

 

Krishna said it twice.

[Guest guest]

 

I think the dictum "be lenient with others and strict with yourself " is the proper attitude.

 

After all sanyasa is a tool for preaching.

It is not the eternal position of the soul.

 

Mahaprabhu initiated the taking of sanyasa for the purpose

of gaining respect from the small minded.

 

At the time the sankarites were considered the height of respectability,and the Krishna Bhaktas were looked upon

as emotional and lacking gravitas.

 

So Mahaprabhu took sanyasa in order to gain the respect

he felt was needed to further his mission.

 

Nityananda Prabhu laughed at him,took his danda and through it into the river.

 

This was a point that we should appreciate,the order of sanyasa is for the benefit of the neophyte,who may need the

appearence of so called respectability in order

to respect the message Mahaprabhu is distributing.

[theist]

I agree with examining these things and speaking out when necessary.

 

I have been trying to play this game with myself called 'stalking the mind'.Some phrase I picked up from someone.One part to the game is when I see a fault in someone I should then try to see it in myself.Not as easy as it sounds.I hope you don't think I was pointing my post at you as I wasn't.

 

There is this pressure to pick a guru any guru, as long as he has a body on, is also a big part of the problem as far as I can see.I think this is where you and I agree on the ritvik thing while not swallowing their whole package.

 

I can appreciate your point on not taking on a duty unless we intend to follow through.This strikes me as a difficult thing.As has been said, at one point in one's life we perceive a certain strong inspiration and feel we will always just stronger.So we make commitments that we may not be able to fulfill when the crap hits the fan on down the line.

 

I think that for us Westerners at least deemphazizing formal sannyasa may be prudent.Let it be for the very rare soul who after much experience and introspection is forced by knowledge realized to adopted that path.Anyway...

 

 

shiva I like that line"lenient with others, but strict with ourselves".Seems I have had it backward all this time.

 

Hare Krsna all

 

[ethos]

Brajamandala,

 

Enough of Vipramukhya Swami's personal problems. Your language now seems to be entering a more philosophical field. Since I know the issues of philosophy and duty alot better than Vipramukhya's personal circumstances, I feel more comfortable answering this.

 

"I'm not using my points as justification for anything"...

Yes, you have been justifying Vipramukhya's human frailty and failure of his responsibility.

 

"but as you go along desires change"...

That may be. Some people may wish to escape the encumbrance of children and family, but to abandon your "loved ones" for simple pleasures is nothing short of hedonism. Prisoners want to get out of jail.

 

There are some decisions you make in life that can't be aborted due to duty. This journey in life with our present body is the ultimate example: you just have to live and let live. Sannyasa is another prominent example of commitment.

 

"I just feel for those who are willing to take that kind of heavy responsibility"...

Yes, we can all appreciate the resolve and renunciation it takes to live an austere life of complete devotion to God, accepting only the necessities. Prabhupada's personal possessions could be fit in a suitcase or two, even though he commanded millions of dollars!

 

"So many who maybe oculd stand up and be counted do not take it on because of all sorts of fears"...

Yes! ...fear of their ability to make that kind of commitment. I possess this kind of fear just as I possess the fear to not swim the Pacific Ocean. Until I feel certain I can do it, until I feel the Supersoul is giving me unequivocal assurance that I can surpass my limitations, I will reamain afraid. In this sense, perhaps one can philosophically argue that people who don't take the leap and fall actually had better discrimination.

 

This does not allude to or say anything about the qualified gurus who don't fall. All glories to their service! They set the standards we should ascribe to.

 

"He responded to the challenge and took it as far as he could."...

Yes, but he overestimated his abilities and convinced others to do the same. The years he successfully practiced his duty and position are his assets, I'm not be-little-ing that. ...He just chose to accept a different lifestyle according to his dispostion; the "failure" and "shame" outweight the newfound possiblities or potential in his mind. But he has left devastation in his wake! Just ask his disciples.

 

"There maybe some gurus around who feel the same way as this swami but will never come clean because they fear dishonour and poverty, they're use to the "high life...

To assumes other's motives without obvious evidence is dangerous. But I can accept your statement for the sake of argument. It is certainly plausible. Still, even though motives may change, commitment to duty may not. You have to please your employer with service, you have to pay taxes, and you have to serve God. Motives may change, but duty is not likely to unless the surrounding circumstances change.

 

"I've witnessed the personal torment a swami goes through long before he falls, his words, his body langage, his mood, his frustration and anger . It's just very sad and that's all I've got to say about it"...

Yes, it's sad. The suffering in the world is sad. And the saddest part is that we bring it upon ourselves.

 

"And as far as Mahak suggesting let the Supersoul guide naturally, I think many don't even know the supersoul in reality let alone be guided by Him"...

This is obviously true - even as we speak. But some do better than others and it's not true for everyone.

 

"I think their false egos guide them more, especially when there is a bit of pratistha to be had"...

This last paragraph is long winded and rambling. I'm not a scholar and not familiar with the term "pratistha". We are all promoting ourselves. That's why we're here. That's the practical nature of a board like this. At least devotees are trying to turn things around. The more we can focus on reality as opposed to ourselves, the more transparent we become. We all have our moments and we are capable of helping each other.

 

"instead of chosen, they end up choosing themselves and promoting themselves so subtly they fool their soon to be followers into thinking they're the naturally effulgent chosen one"...

This is a bit loose for me to comprehend concisely. I not sure of your intended context. I'm not sure if this is a direct accusation or general philosophy. Please elaboate and clarify this closure.

[Guest guest]

Srila Prabhupada's lecture in Vrindavana on verse 56.2. of Srimad Bhagavatam:

 

"Instead of becoming a false sannyasi, do not accept sannyas. This is the injunction of the sastra. But for preaching work we have to get the help of some sannyasi, but we should remember that we are in Kali-yuga. We should not be sentimentally very much anxious, "Please give me sannyas, give me sannyasa" and then fall down and go to hell. That is not good. That is not good. If one is able to strictly follow the sannyas rules and regulation, he should take. Otherwise, Krsna has said that sannyas, real sannyas, means one who does not take any remuneration for his service to Krsna.

That is sannyas. Anasritah karma-phalam karyam karma karoti yah sa sannyasi. It is my duty. I am eternal servant of Krsna. To serve Krsna is my duty. Karyam: I must do it. Actually that mentality is sannyas. It doesn't matter whether have changed the dress or not, but if we decide that I am eternal servant of Krsna; my only duty is to serve Krsna. That is sannyas. So better we should try to stay in this determination than to accept the sannyas order by changing the dress and then again we fall down. That's not very good."

 

© 1991 by Bhaktivedanta Book Trust

 

 

"Shiva" wrote:

"So Mahaprabhu took sanyasa in order to gain the respect

he felt was needed to further his mission.Nityananda Prabhu laughed at him,took his danda and through it into the river."

 

Srila Prabhupada wrote in the purport of CC, ML, 5/142-143:

"In the sannyasa order there are fou r divisions--kuticaka, bahudaka, hamsa and paramahamsa. Only when the sannyasi remains on the kuticaka and bahudaka platforms can he carry a staff. However, when one is elevated to the status of hamsa or paramahamsa, after touring and preaching the bhakti cult, he must give up the sannyasa staff.

... considering Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to be an extraordinary person, Lord Nityananda Prabhu did not wait for the paramahamsa stage. He reasoned that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is automatically on the paramahamsa stage; therefore He does not need to carry the sannyasa-danda. This is the reason Sri Nityananda Prabhu broke the staff into three pieces and threw it into the water."

 

© 1991 by Bhaktivedanta Book Trust

 

 

[brajamandala]

Ethos Prabhu,

Apologies for my very late reply to your post, have been most busy.

I can't say too much as I don't have the time to explain myself, but a few things I can address.

First, Prathistha means fame, recognition. And I agree there are some decisions that should not be aborted due to duty, except though when your duty is no longer of service to those your position should be serving. If the swami cannot fulfil his duty as spiritual master properly then he should step down and let those disciples find another spiritual master. The disciples should look for an uttama-adhikari guru not a madhhyam-adhikari guru who can fall down.

 

Also, who knows what they're capable of when they start out. Yo have to remember, we are not the doers, Krsna does through us, we can only be humble and pray that He will use us in His service, that he will give us what we lack. The Swami may have very much felt that he could be an initiating guru and take on the lives of others with the guidance, strength and meryc of the Lord. We do not know what is ahead, we each have our own karma to deal with until we're purified except if one is on the level of uttama-adhikari as as I've expressed.

 

"Heavy responsability" is not in reference to austerity and renunciation, but as said taking onthe lives of others to shelter them and uplift them and give them proper spiritual guidfance so they progress. It's easy to say in hindsight one overestimated their abilities, we have no ability, Krsna is the ability in man, he canmake us or break us. There is a ref in the Bhagavad-Gita to ability in man, I don't have the time to check it, but you may be able to find it.

I have no time time nmow, please excuse me, My apologies.

[Guest guest]

yes,also mahaprabhu is the supreme enjoyer,

the act of sanyasa was funny because

here mahaprabhu is acting like he is renounced,

nityananda laughed at the absurdity of God

being renounced.

 

[ethos]

Guest, because you replied to me with a title of "Read Srila Prabhupada books", I'm a bit confused as to your point. Your references seem to support my statements but the title you chose makes me think you could be contrary. Please clarify.

 

Brajamandala, I am unmoved and still in disagreement with everything you said.

[brajamandala]

Ethos Prabhu,

What can I say, so be it. Sometimes we need a broader view.

Everything is in the hands of the supreme Lord. The sincere will go on to higher deeper and sweeter, the insincere will put it down to bad experience. A finite point in the infinite.

[ethos]

This sounds like someone on drugs... not saying you are.

What's sincere about forsaking your duty and then justifying it because you've changed your mind?

Are we talking Christian or Vaisnava standards here?

[brajamandala]

Ethos Prabhu,

 

I'm sorry if my last post offended you. Please forgive me.

I'm not saying the swami is sincere in forsaking his duty, I'm merely saying if he cannot fulfil it properly, and cannot offer anythking more to his disciples he should step down. What's so hard to cmprehend?

What happened when the guru called Sripad Bhavananda had to step down, or got kicked down. THE Iskcon GURU, after our Prabhupad unfortunately left us. Are you saying this guru should have stayed on and continued with his nonsense behind closed doors and deluding his disciples in the name of duty?. Taking his disciples down not up? A classic example of a guru not fulfilling his duty. The questionn in point really is should Vipramuhkya have stayed on with his duty mechanically with no substance, no essence, no heart all the while contemplating undesireable nonsense matters? I think not, you can think what you like. If his heart is not in it, and he is contemplating undesireable matters, of what use is he to his discples???

How can the dhara flow through to his disciples. Or are we just after the form and no substance? Fooling ourselves, yeh man , my guru is so great. Vipramuhkya did the right thing. Of course it's better if people can stick with their duty, I'm not saying everyone should whimsically abort their duty if it doesn't quite fit them, the world would be far more chaotic if that was the case, what I am saying is that in the guru/disciple relationship, whichis not merely just some duty like any other duty, the guru has responsiblity to deliver his disciples, if he comes to the realiZation he cannot, then he should leave them and encourage them to find another guru. common sense man.

 

Like I said none of us know the total scenario surrounding his demise, I'm mereley giving the man the benefit of the doubt. It's unfortunate for Iskcon and its PR that he did fall down, but these thigns happen unfortunately. He may have been insincere from the start, he may have been sincere, who knows. After a falldown it looks like apparent insincerity. But who are we to judge.

[ethos]

Brajamandala, I thought I detected a bit of spite in your last reply, but not enough to offend me. I'm happy you took my snide remark in stride.

 

I'm personally not to worried about people using their emotions––favorable or not––when they believe they are supporting dharma or the common interest and not just some egotistic indulgence.

 

Let me say up front that I liked this response of yours the most of all––you seem to have your heart in it. And you are persuasive.

 

What's so hard to cmprehend?...

I think the damage to the bigger picture is hard for me to sign-off-on. What does anyone's word mean if he can just "change his mind"? What does that do to promises? And how that can reinforce the whole cheating program! That's all. I'm not trying to take pleasure in the failure of a superior or anything like that (at least I don't admit that to myself).

 

The Mahabharata as well as other spiritual pastimes rather impressed me with it's characters being true to their word and commitment––even at the cost of their lives sometimes. Look at the vow of celibacy Bhisma took and the circumstances that followed. Still, he did not waver. Arjuna wanted to throw himself in a suicidal fire for failing to return the brahmana's sons for which he was not at fault. He tried his best but God personally frustrated him, so he decided "let me die." Then again, he was saved by Krsna personally. Surely, we have all learned that the resolve of these and other characters to their vows and duties were their shinning glory. These duties and principles are integral with pleasing the Gods, advancing in life, and fulfilling our spiritual purpose.

 

Arjuna argued in the Bhagavad-gita against the destruction of the eternal family tradition just for reasons which we are discussing. We are trained to pursue intense sense gratification and therefore we find it difficult if not impossible to do something else. Yet, if we don't turn things around, despite ourselves, who will do it? Who will save the world? Society is heading full speed towards destruction by forsaking duty and pursuing selfish pleasures.

 

In my naive beginnings in Krsna consciousness, I too made promises personally to Krsna which I haven't kept and they didn't even last long. I understand the eagerness and resolve that fades away into harsher realities. But my failure really didn't effect anyone but myself. We are discussing a much larger issue here with critical ramifications. If our leaders and pillars of the community can't be trusted and are allowed to cheat the public, the citizens simply take that as evidence and act accordingly. The result is little more than a society of cheaters and the cheated.

 

This is the first time I've heard of Sripad Bhavananda; don't know anything about him. Perhaps I've heard of him from years back and just can't remember his name. Sounds here like one of the rascals I've heard about. I also am not familiar with Vipramukhya Swami's circumstance. There have been so many fallen gurus.

 

But there are successes also. What about the ones that haven't fallen? How do they succeed where others fail? They obviously make better choices.

 

You talk about fallen gurus misrepresenting their position when the "dhara" doesn't flow, but I can't help think that's the accrued result of many previous choices and actions directly relating to Krsna and their commitment to Him. In other words, they compromise their duty. I mean we all experience this.

 

This sounds like Rtvik stuff because their whole issue surrounds these same arguments.

 

Well anyway, you are alluding to alot of sensitive issues surrounding this spectacle including the spiritual master being God incarnate on earth, he is not a common man, he is our link to Krsna, I could never equal or surpass him, and so on just by the nature of the topic under discussion. And then you are contrasting all this with human frailty and weakness.

 

All I can say about all this is that there is the real thing, and then there is the false thing; the cheap imitation. He made his choice.

 

Marriage is another commitment you don't renig on. It can also involve alot of people. Prahupada would not approve it but ultimately had to concede to two people not being able to live together. That happened several times.

 

Yes, you make good points. And what can be done? But then are these things realized by our victimization, things beyond our control, or is it we really just don't care? Who knows? Only God knows for sure.

 

I do know that we cannot convince people and change the world if our sacrifice is no better than theirs. I also know that if we cannot objectively understand and practice the distinctive qualities and characteristics of the varnas and ashramas, such differences become irrelevant to us. Practically, the divisions become compromised to satisfy the lowest common demoninator. A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. Prabhupada didn't call us all sudras for nothing.

 

Who are we to judge? Obviously, we can't avoid it. We all know what is expected from us by Krsna and Prabhupada. Unfortunately, we have our own ideas. We have accepted these higher standards for ourselves and others in our community, and that is the criterion by which we judge–– and that is our authority.

 

I have some empathy for your case against human frailty. I'd be a fool not to see it in myself. Still, even though I may personally agree with your speculations, I cannot "officially" commend them as that would undermine everything Krsna and Prabhupada are trying to do for us.

 

The standards of the parampara are principles of liberation. Our standards are tragically self-defeating.

 

My uncompromising position remains firm.

[Guest guest]

The word vairagya is used to describe one of the six opulences of Bhagavan. This Bhagavan is Mayadhisa, the Lord over maya. Bhakti can never be attained by artificial endavours to practice vairagya in nirjana bhajana. people who are not spiritual think that material renunciation is vairagya, but in the sastras we find that vairagya is simply the topmost stage of longing for krsna-vilasa, Krsna's pleasure-pastimes.

 

Prakrta sahajiyas and those renounce material enjoyment practise so-called vairagya to satisfy their desires, but this is merely temporary, deceitful sadhana. Only through the eyes of bhakti can one see or realize the nitya-siddha vairagya of the nitya-siddha mahatmas who are intent on Krsna's happiness.

 

Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Vamana Maharaja, the present Acarya and President of Sri Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti

[Guest guest]

I forgot to say that I found this nice text in the book "Acarya Kesari Sri Srimad Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Gosvami" by Tridandisvami SRimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja.

 

Sorry.

[raga]

 

Prakrta sahajiyas and those renounce material enjoyment practise so-called vairagya to satisfy their desires, but this is merely temporary, deceitful sadhana.

 

 

To the best of my understanding, prakrita sahajiyas do not exactly renounce material enjoyment and practice vairagya.

 

Why, O why, with each and every nice thing we have to mix a word of critique against someone?

 

Poor sahajiyas. Why don't you leave them alone already. Start criticizing the US government instead. That would be a timely object of critique. Even there are no orthodox sahajiya sampradayas any longer! They are a historical relic by now.

 

I think Gaudiya Math should read Prabhupad's books more to find more up-to-date objects of critique, like rascal scientists and the moon landing hoax. Challenge them to produce life from matter! And let them take pictures of the palaces of the moongod! And if they can't, their moon landing is bogus! That would be more interesting a topic to follow than this endless sahajiya rant.

 

Have you ever seen a living sahajiya?

[Guest guest]

In reply to:

____________

I think Gaudiya Math should read Prabhupad's books more to find more up-to-date objects of critique, like rascal scientists and the moon landing hoax.

_________________

 

Someone posted the subject "Vipramukya Swami quits". By reading Srila Prabhupada's books, almost on every page there is his instruction: go to the pure devotee and search for Sri Krishna. This is the only way to get Krishna Prema. There is no other way, no other way, no other way.

 

If you stop a devotee from serving a pure devotee, your spiritual life is zero.

 

Just serve a pure devotee of Sri Krishna and renounce all "renounced" sannyasis who are envious to pure devotees.

 

[Guest guest]

This thread doesn't appear to be very constructive spiritual guidance, why not just let the man retire gracefully and everyone else do the same. Maybe the gentleman is now experiencing some real renunciation away from the spotlight of so many tormented souls. Who knows?

The Lords merciful ways are often mysterious in deed.

Let him do his own closure folks.

[ethos]

One thing is painfully clear to a Vaisnava with a little understanding concerning the material world:

Everybody's trying to tell you their own thing!