anadi Posted November 14, 2003 Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 OBJECTION 10 : Srila PrabhupAda teaches that the initiating guru takes the karma of the disciple. Sria NArAyaNa MahArAja teaches that the guru does not. REFUTATION 10 : It is true that Srila PrabhupAda has mentioned that a spiritual master undergoes some reaction for the misdeeds of his disciples. He writes: “Therefore, duUsvapna – bad dreams – occur because of sinful activities. A devotee sometimes accepts a sinful person as his disciple, and to counteract the sinful reactions he accepts from the disciple, he has to see a bad dream. Nonetheless, the spiritual master is so kind that in spite of having bad dreams due to the sinful disciple, he accepts this troublesome business for the deliverance of the victims of Kali-yuga. After initiation, therefore, a disciple should be extremely careful not to commit again any sinful act that might cause difficulties for himself and the spiritual master.” (Srimad- BhAgavatam 8.4.15) This statement is true for a person who has accepted the position of guru although he himself is not firmly situated on the transcendental platform. Out of his intense humility, Srila PrabhupAda would sometimes refer to himself as such a guru. However, if the disciple accepts the self-realized guru’s expression of genuine humility as an admittance of his limitation, it will be a great offense. When this viewpoint is presented by Srila PrabhupAda, it also has the obvious added advantage of controlling immature and wayward disciples by inducing feelings of guilt about their misbehavior. <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The following article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 14, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2003 This statement is true for a person who has accepted the position of guru although he himself is not firmly situated on the transcendental platform. Out of his intense humility, Srila PrabhupAda would sometimes refer to himself as such a guru. PS One should read this part again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2003 Most probably the difference is claimed by persons with unvirtuous thoughts and reasons. OBJECTION 10 : Srila PrabhupAda teaches that the initiating guru takes the karma of the disciple. Sria NArAyaNa MahArAja teaches that the guru does not. REFUTATION 10 :This statement is true for a person who has accepted the position of guru although he himself is not firmly situated on the transcendental platform. Out of his intense humility, Srila PrabhupAda would sometimes refer to himself as such a guru. However, if the disciple accepts the self-realized guru’s expression of genuine humility as an admittance of his limitation, it will be a great offense. When this viewpoint is presented by , Srila PrabhupAda, it also has the obvious added advantage of controlling immature and wayward disciples by inducing feelings of guilt about their misbehavior. , Srila PrabhupAda’s perfect humility is confirmed in the following excerpts from a conversation with Bob Cohen (later to become PrabhupAda’s initiated disciple). It shows PrabhupAda’s humility, and it also shows his desire to give a neophyte a good reason to stop committing sins: Bob: Do you personally feel disease and sickness? Srila PrabhupAda: Yes. Bob: Is this a result of your past karma? Srila PrabhupAda: Yes. Bob: So one in this material world never escapes his karma completely? Srila PrabhupAda: Yes, he escapes. No more karma for a devotee. No more karmic reaction. Bob: But you must be the best devotee. Srila PrabhupAda: Hm-m... No, I don’t consider myself the best devotee. I am the lowest. Bob: No! Srila PrabhupAda: You are the best devotee. Bob: [Laughs.] Oh, no, no! But what you say... always seems right. Srila PrabhupAda: Yes. Bob: Then you must be the best devotee. Srila PrabhupAda: Just like RAdhArANi, She does not see anyone as a nondevotee. <font color="red"> Therefore we try to approach RAdhArANi .</font color> Bob: Who is this? Srila PrabhupAda: RAdhArANi, KRSNa’s consort. Bob: Ah. Srila PrabhupAda: If anyone approaches RAdhArANi , She recommends to KRSNa, “Here is the best devotee. He is better than Me,” and KRSNa cannot refuse him. That is the best devotee, but it is not to be imitated: “I have become the best devotee.” A second-class devotee has the vision that some are envious of God, but this is not the vision of the best devotee. The best devotee sees, “Nobody is envious of God. Everyone is better than me.” Just like CaitanyacaritAmRta’s author KRSNadAsa KavirAja says, “I am lower than the worm in the stool.” Bob: Who is saying this? Srila PrabhupAda: KRSNadAsa KavirAja, the author of CaitanyacaritAmRta: purISera kITa haite muïi se laghiSTha. He is not making a show. He is feeling like that: “I am the lowest. Everyone is best, but I am the lowest. Everyone is engaged in KRSNa’s service. I am not engaged.” Caitanya MahAprabhu said, “Oh, I have not a pinch of devotion to KRSNa. I cry to make a show. If I had been a devotee KRSNa, I would have died long ago. But I am living; that is the proof that I do not love KRSNa.” That is the vision of the best devotee. He is so much absorbed in KRSNa’s love that he says, “Everything is going on, but I am the lowest. Therefore I cannot see God.” That is the best devotee. <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The following article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Conspicuous is the fact that by speaking about the best devotee Srila BV Svami Prabhupada spontaneously mentions Radha. When he speaks about Krishna's consort, he speaks about Radharani, which reveals his mood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 16, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 16, 2003 Most probably the difference is claimed by persons with unvirtuous thoughts and reasons. OBJECTION 10 : Srila PrabhupAda teaches that the initiating guru takes the karma of the disciple. Sria NArAyaNa MahArAja teaches that the guru does not. REFUTATION 10 SyAmasundara: One time you said that sometimes you feel sickness or pain due to the sinful activities of your devotees. Can sometimes disease be due to that? Caused by that? Srila PrabhupAda: You see, KRSNa says, “ahaM tvAM sarva-pApebhyo mokzayizyAmi mA SucaH – I will deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear.” So KRSNa is so powerful that He can immediately take up all the sins of others and immediately make them right. But when a living entity plays the part on behalf of Kåñëa, he also takes the responsibility for the sinful activities of his devotees. Therefore to become a guru is not an easy task. You see, he has to take all the poisons and absorb them. So sometimes – because he is not KRSNa – sometimes there is some trouble. Therefore Caitanya Mahäprabhu has forbidden, “Don’t make many ziSyas, many disciples.” Here Srila Prabhupäda is playing the role of a neophyte and at the same time speaking to induce hesitation in the minds of those who are actually neophyte and want to play the part of a bona fide spiritual master. “Therefore to make many disciples is a risky job unless one is able to assimilate all the sins.... That idea is also in the Bible. Jesus Christ took all the sinful reactions of the people and sacrificed his life. That is the responsibility of a spiritual master....” On other occasions Srila PrabhupAda said Lord Jesus only pretended to die. He never suffered, because he is a pure devotee. This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The following article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 Most probably the difference is claimed by persons with unvirtuous thoughts and reasons. Bob: Was Christ’s suffering? Srila PrabhupAda: That I have already explained. He took the sinful reactions of all the people. Therefore he suffered. Bob: I see. Srila PrabhupAda: They should have been ashamed (and think that) now, if he again commits sinful activities, his spiritual master has to suffer. A disciple should be sympathetic and consider this: “For my sinful activities, my spiritual master will suffer.” Prabhupada is fully transcendental, untouched by the material energy, and very clever in persuading the conditioned souls to act in their own interests. How can the two statements be reconciled: “The spiritual master takes the karma of the disciple.” and “The spiritual master does not take the karma of the disciple.”? They can be reconciled in this way: he takes them from the disciple, but he does not suffer them. Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja explains that pure devotees are like large fires. No matter how much garbage, in the form of our anarthas and sins, is thrown into a large fire at the time of surrender, the fire consumes it, burning it to ashes, and the fire itself is not affected. What to speak of himself being free from the touch of sinful reactions, simply by his glance and presence the pure devotee can free others from sins. There is no need of his suffering. Srila Narotama Dasa Thakura says in his Ei-BAra KaruNA Kara All sins go away in your association. Where shall we find a master as merciful you? After touching the GANga one becomes purified, but your quality is such that just the sight of you purifies one of his sins! KRSNa Himself says that great souls are not affected by material nature. (Bhagavad-gitä 9.13) <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 18, 2003 OBJECTION 11 : Srila PrabhupAda envisioned a worldwide society where many gurus work collegially under a governing body. Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja practices the GauDiya MaTha single acArya system. Note: Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati ThAkura instructed his followers to also work together under a governing body and Srila PrabhupAda often cited neglect of this order as the cause for the break-up of his spiritual master’s mission. REFUTATION 11 : Srila PrabhupAda writes: “His (Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati ThAkura’s) idea was that the AcArya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly, ‘You make a GBC and conduct the mission.’ So his idea was amongst the members of the GBC, who would come out a successful and self-effulgent AcArya would be automatically selected.” (Letter to RUpAnuga dAsa: April 24, 1974) Objection 11 states that Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja practices the “GauDiya MaTha single AcArya system.” However, Srila MahArAja, although a transcendental personality and not confined to the parameters of any institution, is a member of the GBC of GauDiya VedAnta Samiti. Sri GauDiya VedAnta Samiti was founded in 1940. The three original trustees of the society were Srila Bhakti Prajnana KeSava GosvAmi Maharaja (Srila BV Svami PrabhupAda’s sannyAsa-guru), Pujyapadä NRsimhAnanda BrahmacAri and, at that time, Abhaya CaraNAravinda Prabhu (later known as His Divine Grace Srila A.C. BhaktivedAnta Swami PrabhupAda). Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja follows the constitution established by these three trustees. Sri GauDiya VedAnta Samiti has one president-AcArya, Sri Srimad BhaktivedAnta VAmana GosvAmi MahArAja. Srila BhaktivedAnta NArAyaNa MahArAja is the vice-president and secretary of the society. He and others also act as initiating AcArya within the society, and the society is governed by a GBC. To the present day, the GBC of the Sri GauDiya VedAnta Samiti has run its society peacefully and successfully. <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 19, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 19, 2003 OBJECTION 12 : Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja criticized a number of the names Srila PrabhupAda gave to ISKCON deities. REFUTATION 12 : Objection 12 refers to the occasion when Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja expressed his concern over the worship of some of the deities of RAdha-KRSNa in ISKCON, who are being addressed by the names Nila-madhava, RAdhA-Govinda MAdhava, etc. Srila MahArAja never criticized names given by Srila Prabhupada. <font color="blue"> Rather, he questioned whether PrabhupAda ACTUALLY gave them.</font color> Srila MahArAja is simply bringing to our attention that Srila Prabhupada is a pure devotee of RAdha-KRSNa in the mood of VRndAvana and, as such, those who wish to follow him must necessarily also worship RAdha-KRSNa according to the principles explained by Srila Prabhupada and our previous AcAryas. The names of the above-mentioned deities are either rasa-AbhAsa or inappropriate, insofar as the threefold-bending form of KRSNa playing on a flute in the company of Srimati RAdhArANi can never be addressed by the name of DvArakAdhiSa, the consort of RukmiNi, or as RAdhA-PArtha-sArathi. (This things have been explained by Srila BV Svami Prabhupada himself) This has been clearly explained by Srila Prabhupada in the following excerpt: “The gopis never addressed KRSNa as RukmiNi -ramaNa. KRSNa’s devotees in VRndAvana address Him as RAdhA-ramaNa, Nandanandana and YaSodA-nandana, but not as Vasudeva-nandana or Devaki-nandana. Although according to the material conception, NArAyaNa, RukmiNi-ramaNa and KRSNa are one and the same, in the spiritual world one cannot use the name of KRSNa in the place of RukmiNi-ramaNa or NArAyaNa. If one does so out of a poor fund of knowledge, his mellow with the Lord becomes spiritually faulty and is called rasa-AbhAsa, an overlapping of transcendental mellows. The advanced devotee, who has actually realized the transcendental features of the Lord, will not commit the mistake of creating a rasa-AbhAsa situation by using one name for another. Because of the influence of Kali-yuga, there is much rasa-AbhAsa in the name of extravagance and liberal-mindedness. Such fanaticism is not very much appreciated by pure devotees.” (Sri Caitanyacaritamrta, Purport to Madhya-lila 8.91) <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 20, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 20, 2003 OBJECTION 12 : Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja criticized a number of the names Srila PrabhupAda gave to ISKCON deities. REFUTATION 12 Part2 <font color="blue"> Rather, he questioned whether PrabhupAda ACTUALLY gave them.</font color> Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja has also stated that the name RAdhA- Partha-sArathi is rasa-AbhAsa because Srimati RAdhika never leaves Vrndavana. She is attracted to Sri KRSNa only in His original svayamrüpa feature, which can be found only in Vrndavana; she is not attracted to DvArakAdhiSa-KRSNa or KRSNa on the battlefield of KurukZetra. When Srimati RAdhikA (in a partial manifestation) left Vrndavana to go to KurukZetra, She was not satisfied to see KRSNa dressed like a king; it was not complementary to Her loving moods towards Him. <font color="red"> Although KRSNa, DvArakAdhiSa and even NArAyaNa are one by tattva, they are different by virtue of rasa (rasa vicara).</font color> <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 21, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 OBJECTION 12 : Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja criticized a number of the names Srila PrabhupAda gave to ISKCON deities. REFUTATION 12 Part 3 “KRSNa’s another name name is PArtha-sArathi. PArtha. Arjuna’s name is PArtha. PArtha means, ‘The son of PRtha’. Kunti’s another name is PRthA. Kunti’s father’s name was PRthu, so Kunti’s name was PRthA. Therefore Arjuna’s name was PArtha. And because KRSNa served as the chariot driver of Arjuna, His another name is PArtha-sArathi. So it is a fact that God has no name. Sometimes some philosophers say that ‘God has no name’. That is fact. But why does God have so many names? THESE NAMES ARE CALCULATED ACCORDING TO HIS PASTIMES.” ( <font color="red"> Srila BV Svami Prabhupada Lecture in Los Angeles: January 11, 1974</font color>) <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 22, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 OBJECTION 12 : Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja criticized a number of the names Srila PrabhupAda gave to ISKCON deities. REFUTATION 12 Part4 <font color="blue"> Rather, he questioned whether PrabhupAda ACTUALLY gave them.</font color> Since RAdhA never leaves Vndavana in Her original form (the expansion sam-yogini Radhika goes to KurkSetra), and since KRSNa can never be addressed as PArtha-sArathi in Vrndavana, the combination of these names contradicts the principles of rasa. “If there were a hint that transcendental mellows overlapped in a manner contrary to the principles of the bhakti cult, Sri Caitanya MahAprabhu would not tolerate it and would become very angry.” (Srila BV Svami Prabhupa in Sri Caitanya-caritAmRta, Madhya-lila 8.97) <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 24, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 24, 2003 OBJECTION 12 : Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja criticized a number of the names Srila PrabhupAda gave to ISKCON deities. REFUTATION 12 Part 5 <font color="blue"> Rather, he questioned whether PrabhupAda ACTUALLY gave them.</font color> According to Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja, PrabhupAda never intended the Delhi deities to be called RAdhA-PArtha-sArathi. In the early 1970s, when Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja heard Their name, he asked Srila Prabhupada why he had done that. PrabhupAda answered that he had never given Them such a name, as that would have been a contradiction to his own books. This history is confirmed by the siddhänta presented in the following conversation: Acyutananda: The deities’ name is RAdhA-Partha-sArathi. Prabhupäda: Hm? Acyutananda: The name of the Delhi deities is RAdhA-PArtha-sarathi. So how do we understand? Because PArtha means Arjuna. So RAdha, how does RAdhA get there? Prabhupäda: When KRSNa is Partha-sArathi, RAdhA is out of Him? Does it mean? Indian man (1): What you mean, Partha-sArathi is KRSNa. Acyutananda: Yes. Prabhupäda: That’s all. Yes. RAdhA-kRSNa-praNaya-vikRtir AhlAdinISaktir. When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there. IT IS NOT MANIFEST. (Morning Walk in Madras: January 9, 1976) Here, Srila PrabhupAda states that Radha is NOT MANIFEST in the presence of PArtha-sArathi. <font color="blue"> This article is a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. </font color> For previous references see http://www.audarya-fellowship.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=hinduism&Number=61233&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 25, 2003 Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 Radha ***When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 25, 2003 Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 ***IT IS NOT MANIFEST. Radha, Anadi for materialists NOT MANIFEST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 ***IT IS NOT MANIFEST. Radha, Anadi for materialists NOT MANIFEST. Dear Moderator please delete these stupid and offensive remarks of the revered guest or as he is continuing to behave like bann him, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 PrabhupAda: That’s all. Yes. RAdhA-kRSNa-praNaya-vikRtir AhlAdinISaktir. When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there. IT IS NOT MANIFEST. (Morning Walk in Madras: January 9, 1976) Here, Srila PrabhupAda states that Srimati RadharANi is NOT MANIFEST in the presence of PArtha-sArathi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 The root of offense: Disobeying the spiritual master! Not understanding his mood! As far as the names RukmiNi-DvArakAdhiSa are concerned, when PrabhupAda performed the prANa-prathistha (installation) ceremony for “RukmiNi-DvArakAdhiSa” in Los Angeles in 1968, he named the deities “RAdhA-kRSNa”, and later he went to India. When he returned, he found that a disciple had changed the name. PrabhupAda became disturbed and said, “KRSNa has a peacock feather and flute. He is the son of Nanda. DvArakAdhiSa is the son of VAsudeva. He has no flute and no peacock feather. Why have you changed the name?” The argument was given that since the Los Angeles Temple was opulent, and thus attractive to many people, the names of the deities should reflect that opulence. Srila PrabhupAda replied that Sri Sri RAdhA-kRSNa are supremely opulent. Shortly thereafter PrabhupAda again went to India, and the devotees still kept the name as RukmiNi-DvArakAdhiSa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted November 25, 2003 Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 Please give the reference to this story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 This Story is from the Refutation 12 to the Objection 12 of the same article, a reply to the paper entitled “ISKCON’s position on Srila NArAyaNa MahArAja” by His Grace Badri-nArAyaNa Prabhu. The article will examine, one by one, the points made in that paper, in the light of scriptural evidence and the statementsof Srila Prabhupada himself. Statements of the ISKCON position paper will be refered to as OBJECTION, and ours as REFUTATION. More than that I've personlly heard this story from a sanyasi who left ISKCon, who said that in that temple on the wall there is a letter from the Initiation Ceremony where oficialy Srila BV Svami Prabhupada gives the name Radha Krishna to the Deities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted November 25, 2003 Report Share Posted November 25, 2003 thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2003 Thank you too for your help. anAdi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 26, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 26, 2003 “RAdhA-KRSNa cannot be approached by the neophyte devotees; therefore temple worship according to regulative principles is offered to LakSmi-NarayaNa. Although there may be a RAdhA-KRSNa vigraha, or form, the worship of the neophyte devotees is acceptable as LakSmi-NarayaNa worship. (Srimad-BhAgavatam 4.24.45–46) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2003 Report Share Posted November 27, 2003 "When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there" Wery clear speaking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2003 Report Share Posted November 27, 2003 PrabhupAda: That’s all. Yes. RAdhA-kRSNa-praNaya-vikRtir AhlAdinISaktir. When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there. IT IS NOT MANIFEST. (Morning Walk in Madras: January 9, 1976) ***Here, Srila PrabhupAda states that Srimati RadharANi is NOT MANIFEST in the presence of PArtha-sArathi. No, She "is there". But some not see this. Radha-Partha Sarathi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anadi Posted November 27, 2003 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2003 "When He is fighting, the AhlAdinI-Sakti is there" <font color="blue"> A</font color>hlAdinI-Sakti reads <font color="red"> A - hlAdini </font color>which in sanskrit means without hladini, which means without Radha. One should read carefully. One should not speak against his paramguru, because one cannot read and understand <font color="blue"> </font color> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 27, 2003 Report Share Posted November 27, 2003 "RAdhA-kRSNa-praNaya-vikRtir AhlAdinISaktir" PLS me friend translate for me this citation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.