vsdprasad Posted January 18, 2003 Report Share Posted January 18, 2003 Letter to: Mahatma Gandhi -- Cawnpore 12 July, 1947 Mahatma Gandhijee Bhangi Colony New Delhi. Dear Friend Mahatmajee, Please accept my respectful Namaskar. I am your unknown friend but I had to write to you at times and again although you never cared to reply them. I sent you my papers "Back to Godhead" but your secretaries told me that you have very little time to read the letters and much less for reading the magazines. I asked for an interview with you but your busy secretaries never cared to reply this. Anyway as I am your very old friend although unknown to you I am again writing to you in order to bring you to the rightful position deserved by you. As a sincere friend I must not deviate from my duty towards a friend like your good self. I tell you as a sincere friend that you must immediately retire from active politics if you do not desire to die an inglorious death. You have 125 years to live as you have desired to live but you if you die an inglorious death it is no worth. The honour and prestige that you have obtained during the course of you present life time, were not possible to be obtained by any one else within the living memory. But you must know that all these honours and prestiges were false in as much as they were created by the Illusory Energy of Godhead called the maya. By this falsity I do not mean to say that your so many friends were false to you nor you were false to them. By this falsity I mean illusion or in other words the false friendship and honours obtained thereby were but creation of maya and therefore they are always temporary or false as you may call it. But none of you neither your friends nor yourself knew this truth. Now by the Grace of God that illusion is going to be cleared and thus your faithful friends like Acarya Kripalini and others are accusing you for your inability at the present moment to give them any practical programme of work as you happened to give them during your glorious days of non-co-operation movement. So you are also in a plight to find out a proper solution for the present political tangle created by your opponents. You should therefore take a note of warning from your insignificant friend like me, that unless you retire timely from politics and engage yourself cent per cent in the preaching work of Bhagavad-gita, which is the real function of the Mahatmas, you shall have to meet with such inglorious deaths as Mussolini, Hitlers, Tojos, Churchills or Lloyd Georges met with. You can very easily understand as to how some of your political enemies in the garb of friends (both Indian and English) have deliberately cheated you and have broken your heart by doing the same mischief for which you have struggled so hard for so many years. You wanted chiefly Hindu-Moslem unity in India and they have tactfully managed to undo your work, by creation of the Pakistan and India separately. You wanted freedom for India but they have given permanent dependence of India. You wanted to do something for the upliftment of the position of the bhangis but they are still rotting as bhangis even though you are living in the bhangi colony. They are all therefore illusions and when these things will be presented to you as they are, you must consider them as God-sent. God has favored you by dissipating the illusion you were hovering in, and by the same illusion you were, nursing those ideas as Truth(?). You must know that you are in the relative world which is called by the sages as Dvaita i.e. dual- and nothing is absolute here. Your Ahimsa is always followed by Himsa as the light is followed by darkness or the father is followed by the son. Nothing is absolute truth in this dual world. You did not know this neither you ever cared to know this from the right sources and therefore all your attempts to create unity were followed by disunity and Ahimsa. Ahimsa was followed by Himsa. But it is better late than never. You must know now something about the Absolute Truth. The Truth with which you have been experimenting so long is relative. The relative truths are creations of the daivi maya qualified by the three modes of Nature. They are all insurmountable as is explained in the Bhagavad-gita (7/14). The Absolute Truth is the Absolute Godhead. In the Katha Upanisad it is ordered that one must approach the bona fide Guru who is not only well versed in all the scriptures of the world but is also the realized soul in Brahman the Absolute--in order to learn the science of Absolute Truth. So also it is instructed in the Bhagavad-gita as follows:-- tad viddhi pranipatena pariprasnena sevaya upadeksyanti tad jnanam jnaninas tattvadarsinah (4.34) But I know that you never underwent such transcendental training except some severe penances which you invented for your purpose as you have invented so many things in the course of experimenting with the relative truths. You might have easily avoided them if you had approached the Guru as abovementioned. But your sincere efforts to attain some Godly qualities by austerities etc surely have raised you to some higher position which you can better utilize for the purpose of the Absolute Truth. If you, however, remain satisfied with such temporary position only and do not try to know the Absolute Truth, then surely you are to fall down from the artificially exalted position under the laws of Nature. But if you really want to approach the Absolute Truth and want to do some real good to the people in general all over the world, which shall include your ideas of unity, peace and non-violence, then you must give up the rotten politics immediately and rise up for the preaching work of the philosophy and religion of ``Bhagavad-gita'' without offering unnecessary and dogmatic interpretations on them. I had occasionally discussed this subject in my paper ``Back to Godhead'' and a leaf from the same is enclosed herewith for your reference. I would only request you to retire from politics at least for a month only and let us have discussion on the Bhagavad-gita. I am sure, thereby, that you shall get a new light from the result of such discussions not only for your benefit but for the benefit of the world at large--as I know that you are sincere, honest and moralist. Awaiting your early reply with interest. Yours sincerely, Abhay Charan De. Enclosure--one leaf from Back to Godhead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by Madhav for this reason The back cover of Bhagavad Gita As It Is should not have any quote of Gandhi saying how good gita is. Gandhi was not a mahatma per definition of a mahatma given in gita. Jai Sri Krishna! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by Paul108 Srila Prabhupada wanted to engage Gandhi in the service of Bhagavad-gita, and although he could not do it during Gandhi's life, he as done so after. It is just like Srila Prabhupada said, he is Gandhi's true friend. The real mahatma uses everything for Krishna's service, and Srila Prabhupada has used Gandhi's fame for the greater glorification of Krishna. Hare Krishna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by ram gandhi might not realized that vasudeva is every thing or he might have at the end of his life when he chanted rama's names. we have to appreciate gandhi for truthfulness, simplicity and so many other virtues. he might have been wrong in giving the prescription of ahimsa to every one without consideing their qualification but that is not going to make him low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by theist Nice answer Paul. ram i appreciate what you said also. A person may not be perfect yet they may display certain good qualities in a large way. In America people generaly very much appreciate Martin Luther King. he was a preacher but certainly no saint as it is known he cheated on his wife with other women. But that doesn't diminish the incredible courage he showed in trying to gain some justice for the blacks here. I think we can safely acknowledge and appreciate these elevated traits in others even though they may not be maha-bhagavats. Its just a question of keeping a sense of proportion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by Madhav >>Srila Prabhupada wanted to engage Gandhi in the service of Bhagavad-gita, and although he could not do it during Gandhi's life, he as done so after. It is just like Srila Prabhupada said, he is Gandhi's true friend. The real mahatma uses everything for Krishna's service, and Srila Prabhupada has used Gandhi's fame for the greater glorification of Krishna. << before i comment on the above lines, let me say that ghandi did have good qualities and we do apperciate it. however, he was a politican, not a saint or maha bhagavat. i do not even consider him as the father of bharat nation. he has played part in creating an enemy within bharat. he failed to realize that islam is a barbaric ideology that should not have place on the vedic land. on the vedic land, krishna or rama are the father of nation. now let me comment on the quoted lines. when gandhi did not even care to answer prabhupada's letter, what is the sense in using gandhi's name on back of gita? it is a way to fool the people (deluded gandhi lovers) in attracting them to gita. krishna does not need gandhi to attract any one to Him. He is self illuminating. gandhi's non-violence principle was absolute as in Jainism. Krishna's principle of non-violence is not absolute. when arjun said he does not want to fight, krishna said, "fool, fight!" considering this, gandhi's qoute on back of gita is not right. there is another angle also how some can look at the point. prabhupada, it could be said, stole the vaishnavism teachings from hinduism (sanatana dharma) and preached it saying he is not preaching hinduism. his current followers stole gandhi's so called "big" name/fame to sell gita. is K C so dull that it needs gandhi's name to sell it? are K C goswamis so weak that they need gandhi's name to sell KC? now, we know that the West has stolen yoga from hinduism and sell it, without giving any credit to hinduism. they use aayurveda from hinduism and do not give credit to hindus. similary prabhupada's followrs currently use gandhi's name, even impropperly to sell gita. if gandhi were alive, he would not mind it because he was a "politician" and like favorable publicity. would he become a K C preacher? No.... so, gandhi's name has no place on gita. it gives wrong impression to the hindus and the world that the principle of non-violence givenin gita is absolute. even chaitanya had to rise against the kazi. and kazi surrendered not because of his appreciation of chaitanya's K C, but becasue when he saw a large number of chaitanya followers (satyagrahis) with burning torches in their hands, he felt that they could cause violence or arson and he may not remain alive. the asuras like kazi can only be conrolled by fear of death (yamaraj.) Jai Sri Krishna! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by theist May i ask do you currently live in India? If so do you attack your Moslem neighbors or how do you relate to them? I always hear you dissatisfaction in your posts but I am not sure what you do in your day to day life concerning these issues. Not arguing, just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by Madhav >>May i ask do you currently live in India? If so do you attack your Moslem neighbors or how do you relate to them? I always hear you dissatisfaction in your posts but I am not sure what you do in your day to day life concerning these issues. Not arguing, just curious. << i think it would be better if i do not tell where i live, because what i say has nothing to do about it. no, i do not attack physially to any one if there is no good reason to do so. one thing i do and help from others is to understand the issues. a hindu or a muslim or an HK or any one needs to know the truth about islam that it is barbaric. once it is realized, then i encourage them to think of many non violent ways how to counter islam, aggression or aggresive nature. the need is to attack the islam ideology first. therefore those who say all religions are same are not helping. if i meet a muslim, i ask him to prove why islam is so good and provide evidences that it is not, then tell him to give up islam just because it is not good. many HK's are not born in india. consequently they have no attachement to that holy land. however, they know well that india has many holy places of pilgrimages, like vrindavan, jaganath, etc. they also know that krishan has incarnated many times in india. considering this, i encourage HK's to keep india for the vedic people only (free from the aggresor invader religions). when bullets are flyign at the border, or when terrorists are hidden next door, or when vedic tempels are bombed or sprayed with bulelts, then teh HK's need to understand that there is no need to chant and do sankirtana. the time is to preachkrishna's message He gave to arjun. i also tell that the principle of non viooence given by krishna is not absolute. so, at this time there is no need to follow gandhi, but krishna. any one who thinks that terrorism is not their problem needs to stick out the head from chaitanya charitamrita or any scripture and look around what is happening. let me know what i say makes sense to you. Jai Sri Krishna! \|/ When the house is on fire, the priority is to fight the fire. In Gita, Krishna did not tell Arjun to chant and dance. He said, " ..yuddhAya krita nishchaya." To peach the victims and not the aggressors is sin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 Posted by Vaishnava_das108 prabhupada, it could be said, stole the vaishnavism teachings from hinduism (sanatana dharma) and preached it saying he is not preaching hinduism. his current followers stole gandhi's so called "big" name/fame to sell gita. I fail to understand here what you mean by Srila Prabhupada's "thievery" of Vaishnavism from Sanatana-dharma. Might I remind you of the conclusion of at least two closed threads on this board that Vaishnavism is synonymous with Sanatana-dharma whilst "Hinduism" is not? Apart from that, you have made a very offensive statement in connection with Srila Prabhupada. I'll expect that you will come up with at least 10 different arguments to justify your position.. if i meet a muslim, i ask him to prove why islam is so good and provide evidences that it is not, then tell him to give up islam just because it is not good. Have you actually made a deep study of Islam? Do you know the in's and out's of it, what the practices, theological beliefs, philosophy is all about? Or is your "study" simply a perusal of some of the Internet's worst anti-Islamic propaganda wesbites? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karthik_v Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 I would agree with Madhav, on 2 counts, and not necessarily everything. First, Gandhi was a great man, but had his share of flaws, the worst being his appeasement of Muslims. So, Gita doesn't need his approval to sell. Second, I am afraid that one can't make an in-depth study of Islam, because the religion is very shallow. Can you dive into a pool which is just 4 feet deep? It is nothing but crude Arab nationalism, started by a pedophile. One should never forget that Islam is intolerant towards Hinduism, and expresses that in the crudest possible manner. Countless Hindus have been killed and raped, because the invading barbarians tried to live upto the "ideals" of Islam and tried to emulate their barbaric Prophet. Let us not forget that even our own Goswamis were imprisoned or made to flee by them. Every religion is NOT equal. And Islam is NOT a religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shvu Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Might I remind you of the conclusion of at least two closed threads on this board that Vaishnavism is synonymous with Sanatana-dharma whilst "Hinduism" is not? That's interesting. I am aware of 2 threads which dealt with this issue and were discontinued because the administrator felt they were going nowhere with each person repeating the same arguments. How does this mean that the threads concluded with Vaishnavism being synonymous with SD while Hinduism was not? Unless, you mean a different set of threads, in which case I request you to name them. Since you appear to be clear that "Vaishnavism is synonymous with Sanatana-dharma whilst "Hinduism" is not", I also request you to provide a reference to Sanatana-dharma. What is the origin of this label and what what is it's definition? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 >>I fail to understand here what you mean by Srila Prabhupada's "thievery" of Vaishnavism from Sanatana-dharma. << i do not have large english vocabulary. but let me say it without using word "thievery". When some one sells water taken from ganga, and says it is not from ganga. thn it is a lie. when 1B hindus know that vaishnavism is a part of hinduism since milleniums, then to teachit to strangers and not tell that it is a part of hinduism is nor right. he was ahihdu alright, and so vaishnvism is his heritage. he eid not steal it. he grew in it. he just did not tell as he should have. i am not offednign him a grat aacharya, but one should not fear to tell the truth as it is. to me hinduism is just another name of sanatana dharma. >>Have you actually made a deep study of Islam? Do you know the in's and out's of it, what the practices, theological beliefs, philosophy is all about?<< bin laden and party have made it. what they do affects the world. did you ask them if they made deep study? those who have deeply studied it are preaching in the madress in pak, s. arabia, and even in india and mass producing terrorits. a hindu first need to study gita deeply. then honestly see how other religions are. what is the wisdom in praising or glorifying a religion whose followers have caused many hindu genocide and destroyed vedic temples and raped milions hindu women, and all that for 1200 years? -madhav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 Well Madhava you have just gone from calling Srila Prabhupada a theif to now calling him a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts