Pope

[Guest guest]

The Catholics have a pope parampara. But rather than the pope naming a successor, they do a vote, consisting of around 120 cardinals. They call it the Conclave. This is done in Vatican. It's sort of like that part of Fellowship of the Ring where they all meet in Rivendell. Except more people!

[Guest guest]

 

 

GBC = Cardinals ??

 

Guru = Pope.

[theist]

We have experience in the Bhagavatam of sages choosing by consensus who they want to hear from. So is there a difference here?

 

Also I have read a quote by Jiva Gosvami that one should not accept an ecclesiastical guru.

 

Perhaps someone would kindly expand on this for us.

 

Main Entry: ec·cle·si·as·ti·cal

 

Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin ecclesiasticus, from Late Greek ekklEsiastikos, from Greek, of an assembly of citizens, from ekklEsiastEs

 

1 : of or relating to a church especially as an established institution

2 : suitable for use in a church

 

[theist]

 

Mundane votes have no jurisdiction to elect a Vaiñëava äcärya. A Vaiñëava äcärya is self-effulgent, ...-Madhya 1.220 purport

 

 

[Guest guest]

The Pope has died. Hope he is in Christ-loka now.

[Guest guest]

At least he left his body on the appearance day of Srivas Pandit.

 

I hope the next Pope is as inspiring to the populance.

[gHari]

I thought he was a great Pope and ambassador for religion. I wish him well, and thank him for all he did in raising the consciousness of the planet.

 

We can only hope for an equally sincere successor.

 

[Guest guest]

It is true the vaisnava acharya is self effulgent, at the same time they can be appointed and empowered from a higher acharya who has the vision to see who they really are, and the potential they have to lead, because the lower section may not have that vision to see them.

Srila Rupa Goswami is the prime example of this where Mahaprabhu requested all the vaisnavas to give all support to Sri Rupa as He had done Himself.

This can save a lot of offence from people without that vision, otherwise there can be endless dispute over who is and isn't qualified to lead.

Elected gurus are another matter as it depends on so many variables, this is not such a reliable system.

But sometimes even the lower section may get it right if there is enough sincerity amongst them. Thru the will of God a qualified agent may be elected to a post to effect change or carry a particular line and it's values.

Ultimately we should listen to the pure devotees views on who is who and where, not rely on our own speculations or those who are not exemplary in their practice. Only problem with that is still the same, how do those with less vision recognize one, other than thru the higher vision of the suddha bhakta.

There is also another consideration of those that are given such positions, and that is that the service they may engage in thru such a responsible post can purify them further if they execute it according to the will of God rather than abuse such a position, they may then evolve to a pure platform in the coarse of their service.

Just as piety is self evident so is corruption, and it will not stand the test of time, by their fruits you will always know them. Circumstantial evidence often has a way of coming to the surface, like a dead body.

[gHari]

From <a href=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1552249,00.html>Times Online</a>: <blockquote>"I am happy and you should be happy too," he said. "Do not weep. Let us pray together with joy."

 

His last moments were described early today by Father Jarek Cielecki, director of Vatican Service News, a Catholic TV channel. "The Holy Father died looking towards the window as he prayed, and that shows that in some way he was conscious," Cielecki said.

 

"A short while before dying, the Pope raised his right hand in a clear, although simply hinted at, gesture of blessing, as if he became aware of the crowd of faithful present in St Peter's Square, who in those moments were following the reciting of the Rosary," he added.

 

"Just after the prayer ended, the Pope made a huge effort and pronounced the word 'Amen'. A moment later, he died."

</blockquote>

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/text/2005/apr/02/040203442.html

 

[Avinash]

We have experience in the Bhagavatam of sages choosing by consensus who they want to hear from.

 

In Puranas, you will see many incidents in which one person was chosen to give discourse and others listened to him. In some cases, the speaker was chosen because others thought that he knew something which they did not. But, in some cases, they selected a speaker even if they already had the knowledge of whatever the speaker would say. This is because they were interested in listening the glories of Lord.

 

In Bhagavatam, there is mention of some sages selecting Sanandan Kumar to give discourse. I do not think that others did not have the knowledge. After all, the others were also great sages:- the other three Kumaras and some other sages.

 

Even now it happens (esp. in villages in India) that one person recites the stories from a scripture and others flock to him to listen to him even if they have heard those stories many times before.

[krsna]

He exibited many saintly qualities and yet ate meat. How is that possible?

[Guest guest]

>>How could someone so devout and follower a follower of Jesus >>be a meat-eater

 

>>He exibited many saintly qualities and yet ate meat. How is >>that possible?

 

Bhaktivode Thakur ate meat too, what' your point?

[Guest guest]

I ask the readera and writers to think of two terms of vaisnavism. Uttama-adhikari and avadhuta. I ask the scholar to define these terms here, so we can see if John Paul could perhaps fit the criteria.

 

Politically speaking, he is very perfect as far as I am concerned. He had extremely conservative views on issues while having extremely liberal views on other issues.

 

I regard Him as one of the ONLY PRO LIFE advocates, one who sees the unborn, refugee, and war victim with the same compassion.

 

All glories to this great spiritual leader, that even the Catholics could not see.

 

Hare Krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

PS He is not gods representative, nor is he jesus' representative, he is the partial manifestation of the Vehicle of the relationship between Lord Jesus Christ and His Father, the Blessed Mary of Axum, Israel, the wife of God. The Pope is annointed by Mary, no one else. Thanks for your comment, gHari

[theist]

I don't think he was an uttama adhikarti or an avadhuta. Frankly I don't think he was self realized or he would have seen soul in the animal forms as well.

 

In any case he was a giant among the world's top leaders and a tremendous force for good. The way he stood against the Nazi's and the communists was awesome. I just saw a news clip of him standing opposite the leader of Poland when the commies still ruled. There was the Pope at one microphome in his priestly robes and opposite him was what's his name in his military uniform. The camera zoomed in on the Polish leaders knees which were visible shaking in the Popes presence. I am surprised he remained standing. His part in bringing down communism can't be overestimted they say.

 

And who knows how many abortions he prevented just by his standing firm for life on moral grounds.

 

I feel the loss as does the rest of the world it seems.

 

[Guest guest]

Mahatmas like Suka Dev or Vamsi das Babaji are real avadutas and uttama adhikari. They have absolutely no material consideration, no concern for their bodies appearance, fully rejoicing within their internal relationship with Krsna on the transcendental plane, this sort of detachment will rarely be seen in this world. It is not a cheap title.

The Pope was a good man who stood up for what he believed based on strong traditional moral principles, that takes some spunk in these days of watered down everything. He also had a very tolerant attitude towards other faiths. But let us not speculate and mix up these definitions of purity. It's not for us to judge his adhikar but As Theist has said a self realized soul would be far more familiar with the plane of the spirit what to speak of God realization.

Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur may have tried eating meat but that doesn't mean he lived on it, avadutas can eat meat without material reaction but it won't then become their diet with a little wine to chase it down at each meal, this is the same with the Dalai Lama, if that is their habit then their sacrifice is less, which means they will only reach a certain level of understanding the glories of Gods kingdom, still due to past pious activities they may be utilized in a particular service to the suffering animation of this world, and appeal to a certain quarter for their views. Anyone with a higher taste will find their conceptions of divinity lacking real nectar, that the saragrahi vaisnava craves.

Because he is the centre of a billion peoples focus, of course he will draw out certain sentiments, put yourself in a crowd of even a hundred thousand centred on one preacher and even if they don't say a word most will be moved in various ways. The Dalai lama only has to giggle and people are charmed.

 

Bhaktivinode Thakurs example was altogether different, as was his motive and his realization, they are truly worlds apart, but then again that doesn't mean that if the Pope were to receive the darsan of Bhaktivinde somewhere in time that he may not appreciate his realization.

If anyones life has been utilized to draw souls attention to God then it has been well spent and is to be respected and that we do.

[krsna]

________

 

Bhaktivinode Thakurs example was altogether different, as was his motive and his realization, they are truly worlds apart, but then again that doesn't mean that if the Pope were to receive the darsan of Bhaktivinde somewhere in time that he may not appreciate his realization.

If anyones life has been utilized to draw souls attention to God then it has been well spent and is to be respected and that we do.

 

____