Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

> he hasnt come all by himself to the conviction that smoking is bad and should be given up.
What should he do, how should he think so as to damage neither his health nor his sense of free will?

Smoking and health are mutually exclusive. One cant have a cake and eat it.

> So one ends up unable to decide whether one is doing it in free will, or not, and remains stuck in habits and activities that one oneself is convinced they are wrong/bad/not good enough.

Why not to apply the same logic on continuing the habit? Why its taken as default?

>Which tends to make for a very stressful and frustrating experience of life.
Yep, because it is wrong approach.

>What should he do, how should he think so as to damage neither his health nor his sense of free will?
There are many people who never smoke but die in an early age, and there are also many people who smoke a lot but still live 80-90 years so it is not an absolute fact.

>How to overcome such a dilemma?
What price are you ready to pay?

> What should he do, how should he think so as to damage neither his health nor his sense of free will?

He should decide to stop smoking in the same way he decided to start smoking. Why does this person make it exceedingly more complicated then it needs to be?

This is one of best nonsenses I have heard in a while: "If I give up smoking because someone told me to, then I will be violating the sacred principle of free will!" This mentality represents one the greatest self-induced illusions ever: vice justified as virtue. If I was a gambling man, I would bet that this person cannot actually give up smoking, but in order to appear as a great moralist or philosopher they perform such mental gymnastics so as to conclude that continuing the habit is to uphold a moral or philosophical position. Id say that smoking is the least of their worries...the mental habit of justifing vice as virtue is infinitely more dangerous.

Another great example of someone justifying weakness as virtue is Sri Arjuna. Arjuna considered his non-violent approach as a magnanimous and righteous virtue, however Krishna considered Arjunas approach as degarding impotence, and weakness of heart. (Bg 2.3).

Distinguishing whether one is doing something because oneself wants to, or whether one is doing it because others have told one so, is sometimes an important part of psychological counseling and also Western culture in general. There is the theory of the locus of control: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locus_of_control

For example, I was in counseling once, and the counselor kept focusing on this - "Do you want to do this because _you_ want to do it, or do you want to do it because _others_ want you to do it?"
I have found this question to be extremely frustrating, I couldnt answer it.

Some devotees, too, keep focusing on this "what _you_ want as opposed to what _others_ want you to do" when they explain devotional service.

In my experience, in Western culture, it often happens that following someones advice comes with strings attached. If one follows anothers advice, this can mean that the advice-giver gets the upper hand in the relationship and the advice-taker is then in an inferior position. Giving and accepting advice can become an aspect of the power struggle in the relationship, and the way to protect oneself from becoming inferior (and being inferior means having to put up with abuse from the superior) is by not acting on the advice, health and wealth be damned.

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]This is one of best nonsenses I have heard in a while: "If I give up smoking because someone told me to, then I will be violating the sacred principle of free will!" This mentality represents one the greatest self-induced illusions ever: vice justified as virtue. If I was a gambling man, I would bet that this person cannot actually give up smoking, but in order to appear as a great moralist or philosopher they perform such mental gymnastics so as to conclude that continuing the habit is to uphold a moral or philosophical position. Id say that smoking is the least of their worries...the mental habit of justifing vice as virtue is infinitely more dangerous. [/quote]

I know a married couple in their sixties. The wife smokes, but the husband disapproves of it strongly, and keeps criticizing her for it, telling her to stop smoking, showing her those awful pictures of people with lung cancer and so on. But she doesnt stop, nor does she smoke any less. Also, they have a history of domestic violence when they were younger.[br]
[br]From speaking with her, I am quite sure she wants to stop. But it appears she is afraid that if she would, this would mean her husband once more gets the upper hand in the relationship, defeat her again. So she continues to smoke, and thereby retain some semblance of free will in the relationship.[br]

[br]It seems to me that many people have this sort of psychological entanglement that keeps them stuck when it comes to giving up bad habits and addictions or taking up a positive course of action.

[quote][cite] dweller-in-peace:[/cite]
>How to overcome such a dilemma?
What price are you ready to pay?[/quote]

I suppose the next question is - What is to be gained by overcoming that dilemma?

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Why not to apply the same logic on continuing the habit? Why its taken as default?[/quote]

It appears the current status quo is taken as default.[br]

[br]Perhaps this dilemma between doing something in free will or due to giving in to others is a false one to begin with. But for some reason, it seems to have quite a prominence in Western culture. All those calls to "think for yourself", "dont be a sheep", "be an individual", "dont be just another brick in the wall". And this comes with a lot of stress, so it seems important to look into it.

> From speaking with her, I am quite sure she wants to stop. But it appears she is afraid that if she would, this would mean her husband once more gets the upper hand
> in the relationship, defeat her again. So she continues to smoke, and thereby retain some semblance of free will in the relationship.

The same dynamic Arjuna displayed is still present. Both this person and Arjuna have chosen a path of action that they are convinced is essential for their happiness, but which in the bigger picture is not for their ultimate good.

> It seems to me that many people have this sort of psychological entanglement that keeps them stuck when it comes to giving up bad habits and addictions or taking up
> a positive course of action.

Arjuna also enquired about this phenomena: "By what is one impelled to sinful acts, even unwillingly, as if engaged by force?" (3.37). Krishna replied: rajo-gunuc0u803 a-samudbhavahu803 - contact with the mode of passion (3.38). What is the solution?: indriyu257 nu803 y u257 dau niyamya - begin by regulating the senses. (3.41)

I would add that regulating the senses is essential but in itself is not enough, or as Krishna says above, u257 dau, this is the beginning. The person then must have some positive, suitable spiritual engagement to experience a superior consciousness and enjoyment than material sense gratification: parau109 u769 dru803 su803 tu803 vu257 nivartate - sense gratification will cease only by experiencing a higher taste (2.59). Prabhupada writes in the purport: "Therefore, restrictions are there for the less intelligent neophytes in the spiritual advancement of life, but such restrictions are only good until one actually has a taste for Kru803 su803 nu803 a consciousness. When one is actually Kru803 su803 nu803 a conscious, he automatically loses his taste for pale things."

I second Dina.

> For example, I was in counseling once, and the counselor kept focusing on this - "Do you want to do this because _you_ want to do it, or do you want to do it because _others_ want you to do it?"
I have found this question to be extremely frustrating, I couldnt answer it.

Its a false dilemma. West has no idea about five factors of action.

Abuse and struggle in place of loving service - thats the perversion of material world. Ahankara vimudhatma.

> All those calls to "think for yourself", "dont be a sheep", "be an individual", "dont be just another brick in the wall". And this comes with a lot of stress, so it seems important to look into it.

Atheists often challenge theists: Think for yourself! Dont parrot some old book! But they themselves cant actually produce any original thought. When this is pointed out, they shut up.
This is a manipulation used to create distrust and division among people for easier control by asuras. Something like when Buddha said Dont follow Vedas, follow me. In fact, we dont live in vacuum. Our life is molded by the historical experience of mankind.

>I suppose the next question is - What is to be gained by overcoming that dilemma?

It depends how thirsty you are.

My dear bhaktine baker ....you are unable to appreciate absolute knowledge in a devotional surrounding and environment.Your example is consistent with your material conditioning and vision.However krishna only allows you minimal choices.Which are demonstrated in his context,according to his sweet will and his time and unique circumstances.In other words....yes you have free will,but there are severe limitations to this free will.Practically everything is conditioned by sri krishna chaitanyas desire and purpose once one takes the initial steps towards krishna.You seem fuzzy and unclear about your individual choices and there consequences.Be trained in the material environment to always be an individual and unique is thoroughly unrealistic,apart from being totally conditioned in the same way as millions of others......and the trillions of other followers of the 3 material modes .

Actually we merely choose to be conditioned by maya or by sri krishna and his devotees.Mayadevi will induce insanity and incredible lusty desires,which will further condition us in the cycle of trying to please such unlimited desires....an impossible proposition.Or we choose to bravely attempt to search after krishnas mercy.Such wonderful endeavours are only successful with the mercy of senior vaisnavas and krishna....guru-krishna prasadam.

http://connect.krishna.com/node/6344 great article on free will

All glories to Srila Abhay Caranaravinda Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada!

According to Srila Gour Govinda Swami Srila Gurudeva, "Minute independence has been given to you only for this purpose: to surrender unto Sri Krishna.

From www.asitis.com, Bhagavad Gita As It Is 1973 Edition:

CH 3 TEXT 5
All men are forced to act helplessly according to the impulses born of the modes of material nature; therefore no one can refrain from doing something, not even for a moment.

CH 3 TEXT 27
The bewildered spirit soul, under the influence of the three modes of material nature, thinks himself to be the doer of activities, which are in actuality carried out by nature.

CH 5 TEXT 14

The embodied spirit, master of the city of his body, does not create activities, nor does he induce people to act, nor does he create the fruits of action. All this is enacted by the modes of material nature.

PURPORT

The living entity, as will be explained in the Seventh Chapter, is one in nature with the Supreme Lord, distinguished from matter, which is another nature--called inferior--of the Lord. Somehow, the superior nature, the living entity, has been in contact with material nature since time immemorial. The temporary body or material dwelling place which he obtains is the cause of varieties of activities and their resultant reactions. Living in such a conditional atmosphere, one suffers the results of the activities of the body by identifying himself (in ignorance) with the body. It is ignorance acquired from time immemorial that is the cause of bodily suffering and distress. As soon as the living entity becomes aloof from the activities of the body, he becomes free from the reactions as well. As long as he is in the city of body, he appears to be the master of it, but actually he is neither its proprietor nor controller of its actions and reactions. He is simply in the midst of the material ocean, struggling for existence. The waves of the ocean are tossing him, and he has no control over them. His best solution is to get out of the water by transcendental Krsna consciousness. That alone will save him from all turmoil.

CH 14, TEXT 19

When you see that there is nothing beyond these modes of nature in all activities and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to all these modes, then you can know My spiritual nature.

20.
When the embodied being is able to transcend these three modes, he can become free from birth, death, old age and their distresses and can enjoy nectar even in this life.

21.
Arjuna inquired: O my Lord, by what symptoms is one known who is transcendental to those modes? What is his behavior? And how does he transcend the modes of nature?

22-25.
The Blessed Lord said: He who does not hate illumination, attachment and delusion when they are present, nor longs for them when they disappear; who is seated like one unconcerned, being situated beyond these material reactions of the modes of nature, who remains firm, knowing that the modes alone are active; who regards alike pleasure and pain, and looks on a clod, a stone and a piece of gold with an equal eye; who is wise and holds praise and blame to be the same; who is unchanged in honor and dishonor, who treats friend and foe alike, who has abandoned all fruitive undertakings--such a man is said to have transcended the modes of nature.

26.
One who engages in full devotional service, who does not fall down in any circumstance, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus comes to the level of Brahman.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Atheists often challenge theists: Think for yourself! Dont parrot some old book! But they themselves cant actually produce any original thought. When this is pointed out, they shut up.[br]
This is a manipulation used to create distrust and division among people for easier control by asuras. Something like when Buddha said Dont follow Vedas, follow me. In fact, we dont live in vacuum. Our life is molded by the historical experience of mankind.[/quote]

I think a lot depends on whether one thinks that neutrality/objectivity/complete independence are possible for humans. Also, whether one thinks that the emic vs. etic distinction is meaningful.[br]

[br]There is a strong demand among Westerners, perhaps elsewhere as well, that one should choose ones religion on the basis of a neutral, objective knowledge about the world, God, ourselves, everything. Something like becoming enlightened first, and then picking a religion, but not before. There is the notion that free will can only truly be applied once one has the position of neutrality, objectivity and complete independence, but that any other choice is simply due to deterministic or random bias, and as such invalid.[br]

[br]What confuses me is that some devotees explain their decision to take up the path of Krishna consciousness in those Western terms, and they give instruction to that effect as well. As if one should be neutral, objective and completely independent first, and only then make decisions about taking up a particular spiritual path.[br]

[br]IOW, what I am looking for is what I call "a valid entry point" into the path of Krishna consciousness - and there doesnt seem to be any such point. Perhaps looking for such an entry point is an artificial imposition to begin with. From the perspective of GV it probably doesnt even exist or isnt a problem (since everything is considered to happen according to Gods will anyway, and as per BG 7.16, distress, poverty, curiosity, and desiring to know the Absolute Truth are considered sufficient entry points). But it surely exists from the perspective I am coming from (where the distinctions insider vs. outsider, emic vs. etic are considered valid).[br]

[br]To me, it seems that the devotees have something that I do not have, and that even if I chant, go to meetings, keep the regulative principles etc., I am still an outsider. That there is some decision they have made before taking up the path of KC at all, or some special something that they have that makes them insiders. Some decision or something that is external to BG 7.16 and 4.11. And this worries me very much.

> I think a lot depends on whether one thinks that neutrality/objectivity/complete independence are possible for humans.

In a conditioned state its not possible. "becoming enlightened first" are really special cases.

> Also, whether one thinks that the emic vs. etic distinction is meaningful.

Depends on a particular case.

Entry points are many. Hearing the mahamantra, reading a book, eating a prasadam cookie...

What makes one insider is only a positive attitude to Krsna and a desire to serve Him. This creates ajnata sukriti so one can start conscious devotional service. Ive mentioned it before.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]
> Also, whether one thinks that the emic vs. etic distinction is meaningful.[br]

Depends on a particular case.[/quote]

Could you please give some examples of when do you think this distinction is meaningful, and when it is not?[br]

[br]I so far wasnt able to find much literature on how to begin to develop a religious belief - in the pre-religious, meta-religious sense where one it as the stage of choosing a particular religion to aspire to to begin with.
[br]There are Pascals Wager and William James doctrine on the will to believe, building on Pascals Wager. Both assume that one is starting from a relatively neutral, irreligious position, and then strategically decides to place ones hopes into this or that particular religious path. But both of these seem to set one up for a life of silent doubt and despair, since the religious path started on in such a manner seems to forever stay merely tentative, a self-fulfilling prophecy at most, as everything hinges on that one intial decision to take it up.[br]

[br]Where would you say Pascals Wager lacks the most?[br]

[br][quote]What makes one insider is only a positive attitude to Krsna and a desire to serve Him.[/quote]

How does one get this positive attitude to Krsna and the desire to serve Him?[br]

[br]And again - for me, there is this enormous difference in how I feel and think about Krishna and GV, depending on whom I am with or think of. There are some people, devotees and non-devotees, around whom I seriously start to think that being a hardcore atheist is a good thing. Around some other people, devotees and non-devotees, I feel very positively about Krishna and feel willing to invest a lot of effort into my spiritual practice. This difference is very confusing for me. Should I not have the same desires and inclinations regardless of whom I am with or thinking of?[br]

[br]I know - you will probably tell me to seek out those who encourage me in Krishna consciousness and avoid those who dont. Somehow, I am not comfortable with being selective like that.[br]

[br][quote]This creates ajnata sukriti so one can start conscious devotional service. Ive mentioned it before.[/quote]

Yes, you have. I am keeping it in mind, trying to work my reasoning so as to come to see how it fits in in my mind. Pascals Wager, for example, does not presume there is any real benefit from executing religious service, other than the benefit of the mere fact that one has executed it as opposed to omitting it ("its only a ritual that has to be done").

Everything takes place according to the will of Krishna. If He doesn'92t will, a blade of grass will not shake. So it is a question of faith. But why do we lack faith? Dhruva immediately put strong faith. He was not afraid of any situation. '93Where is that Narayan? Where is Narayan!'94 The example is also there in the story about the young boy and Gopal. But we can'92t put faith. What is the reason? Why are these small children able to have faith, but adults cannot? It is because you are crooked and they are simple. A child is very simple, but as soon as he grows up and associates with adults, those who are very crooked, he develops crookedness. Otherwise, in the beginning a child is very simple. Simplicity is vaisnavism. All our acaryas have said this. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami stresses on this; saralata hi vaisnavata'97simplicity is vaisnavism. Real vaisnavas are as simple as a child.

There is no question of crookedness, duplicity or pretentiousness in them. But our heart is full of these things. We are not al all simple-hearted persons. We are very crooked. Duplicity, crookedness, and pretentiousness are in you. But Krishna is in your heart. He knows what is in you; you cannot cheat Him. Therefore we say that sadhu-guru-mahajan are patita pavana, not kapati-pavana - they are the saviors of the fallen, not saviors of the crooked.

Questions:
Devotee: How can someone develop simplicity?

Gour Govinda Swami: Associate with a simple sadhu. As I described by guru-maharja, how he came and inculcated faith. And why are you lacking faith now? Because you are not associating with sadhus! You say, '93We cannot see sadhu. There are no sadhus present now.'94 That'92s the whole trouble with you.

But if we are duplicitous in the heart, then we will be blind and won'92t be able to see who is a sadhu. So how can we associate with sadhus if we don'92t know who is a sadhu?

Therefore I say, even if sadhu comes, because you are blind you have no faith in him. You want to be the seer, so you cannot get any benefit. You cannot associate. If a sadhu comes and chants here, speaks krsna-katha, it will never enter your ear. You cannot get any benefit. You don'92t do sadhu-sanga at all. Although you come and sit here, you are just posing, you are just pretending. You are such a pretender! Because you have no faith, the sadhu'92s katha will never enter your ear. Thus, you cannot get any benefit. Just pretending. Sitting for ten or fifteen minutes, then getting up and going out. Why is this? Because you have no faith. You are not simple. You want to be the seer. But you are not the seer. That'92s the whole trouble.

So I should just give it up?

Gour Govinda Swami: Yes! Give up everything! Just throw it out! Throw it out! Make your heart clean and open. Jesus Christ said, '93Empty thyself. I will fill thee.'94 But you are not emptying. Your heart is full to the brim with crookedness, duplicity and enviousness - all nasty things. How can he fill you? There is no space. Empty yourself. Throw it out! Then you will get.

[From an evening program in Lansing, Michigan on 28 October 1991]

maah! - simplicity is vaisnavism

Yes, very true. Simplicity is nice. No complication.

I dont have any specific example on my fingertips. Imho both views are useful. Therefore sometimes religionists who try to objectively study a religion join it for some time to get the insider look as well and then they try to combine outsider and insider looks to get a meaningful result.

We already discussed Pascals Wager, didnt we? SP basically supported it, adding that the benefit from devotional service is not to be waited for till the end of ones life but one can feel it throughout ones life. This inner satisfaction is accepted as one of the pramanas by Manu (atmanas tusti, Manusamhita 2.6).

Btw, Pascal allegedly said: "Nature confuses the skeptics and reason confutes the dogmatists."
Imho, Prabhupada would appreciate it since he used to say that real religion must have head and heart, otherwise its either a speculation or a fanaticism.

> How does one get this positive attitude to Krsna and the desire to serve Him?

By associating with Krsnas tadiya. See the five most potent ways of d.s. in CC 2.22.128-129.

> Should I not have the same desires and inclinations regardless of whom I am with or thinking of?

No. Therere various levels of devotees. Neophyte devotees are still heavily influenced by their material conditioning. One cant evaluate a path acc to those who just began to follow it.
Choosing the encouraging association is a normal thing. Everyone associates as per ones interests and work to make progress. SP gave the example of a business chamber for businessmen (NOI 2). So try to associate with advanced devotees. Internet made it easier for those who live far from temples. Email, websites, blogs, lectures, videos are just a few clicks away. Its up to us to take advantage of it or not.

> trying to work my reasoning so as to come to see how it fits in in my mind.

Ajnata sukriti has nothing to do with mind. Its bhakti in essence. Since Narada Muni says in his Narada bhakti sutra that bhakti has no cause other than bhakti itself. More about ajnata sukriti is in Jaiva dharma. Most of it is quoted on our site.

Very nice sadhu -sanga prabhu....you are like a banyan tree for all of us to take shelter from kalis miserable degrading influence....Well done .Veda prabhu

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> How does one get this positive attitude to Krsna and the desire to serve Him?

[br]By associating with Krsnas tadiya. See the five most potent ways of d.s. in CC 2.22.128-129.[/quote]

I dont understand what the reference "CC" means here? I take it you mean CC Madhya 128 - "One should associate with devotees, chant the holy name of the Lord, hear uc0u346 ru299 mad-Bhu257 gavatam, reside at Mathuru257 and worship the Deity with faith and veneration." [br]

[br][quote]No. Therere various levels of devotees. Neophyte devotees are still heavily influenced by their material conditioning. One cant evaluate a path acc to those who just began to follow it.[/quote]

I am not evaluating the path. I am trying to assess my position on it.[br]

[br][quote]Choosing the encouraging association is a normal thing. Everyone associates as per ones interests and work to make progress. SP gave the example of a business chamber for businessmen (NOI 2). So try to associate with advanced devotees.[/quote][br]

I have tried to do so, but there seems to be an unbridgeable gap between myself and them. Communication dries out. Apparently I am not advanced enough to associate with advanced devotees.[br]

[br][quote]Internet made it easier for those who live far from temples. Email, websites, blogs, lectures, videos are just a few clicks away. Its up to us to take advantage of it or not.[/quote]

Sure. But having "associated" quite a bit online, I have gotten the impression that online associacion of any kind is stolen or fake somehow. I am not saying this to denigrate anyone, but I do have fears and doubts whether the people whom I communicate with online would have the same communications with me IRL.[br]
In my experience, online, it is very easy to assume too much familiarity with people. To me, to have someones associacion may mean a lot, but to the other person, its a mere trifle. The relationship is extremely uneven, one-sided, and sooner or later dissolves.[br]

[br][quote]> trying to work my reasoning so as to come to see how it fits in in my mind.

[br]Ajnata sukriti has nothing to do with mind. Its bhakti in essence. Since Narada Muni says in his Narada bhakti sutra that bhakti has no cause other than bhakti itself. More about ajnata sukriti is in Jaiva dharma. Most of it is quoted on our site.[/quote]

No, I meant whether on the GV path, one may place any hopes in attaining any realization or anything even before death. With Pascals Wager and mainstream Christianity, for example, one is expected to hold on until the time of death, accepting that despite effort, there may come no realization or benefit whatsoever during ones lifetime.

[quote][cite] maah!:[/cite]Everything takes place according to the will of Krishna. If He doesn'92t will, a blade of grass will not shake. So it is a question of faith. But why do we lack faith? Dhruva immediately put strong faith. He was not afraid of any situation. '93Where is that Narayan? Where is Narayan!'94 The example is also there in the story about the young boy and Gopal. But we can'92t put faith. What is the reason? Why are these small children able to have faith, but adults cannot? It is because you are crooked and they are simple. A child is very simple, but as soon as he grows up and associates with adults, those who are very crooked, he develops crookedness. Otherwise, in the beginning a child is very simple. Simplicity is vaisnavism. All our acaryas have said this. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami stresses on this; saralata hi vaisnavata'97simplicity is vaisnavism. Real vaisnavas are as simple as a child.

There is no question of crookedness, duplicity or pretentiousness in them. But our heart is full of these things. We are not al all simple-hearted persons. We are very crooked. Duplicity, crookedness, and pretentiousness are in you. But Krishna is in your heart. He knows what is in you; you cannot cheat Him. Therefore we say that sadhu-guru-mahajan are patita pavana, not kapati-pavana - they are the saviors of the fallen, not saviors of the crooked.

Questions:
Devotee: How can someone develop simplicity?

Gour Govinda Swami: Associate with a simple sadhu. As I described by guru-maharja, how he came and inculcated faith. And why are you lacking faith now? Because you are not associating with sadhus! You say, '93We cannot see sadhu. There are no sadhus present now.'94 That'92s the whole trouble with you.

But if we are duplicitous in the heart, then we will be blind and won'92t be able to see who is a sadhu. So how can we associate with sadhus if we don'92t know who is a sadhu?

Therefore I say, even if sadhu comes, because you are blind you have no faith in him. You want to be the seer, so you cannot get any benefit. You cannot associate. If a sadhu comes and chants here, speaks krsna-katha, it will never enter your ear. You cannot get any benefit. You don'92t do sadhu-sanga at all. Although you come and sit here, you are just posing, you are just pretending. You are such a pretender! Because you have no faith, the sadhu'92s katha will never enter your ear. Thus, you cannot get any benefit. Just pretending. Sitting for ten or fifteen minutes, then getting up and going out. Why is this? Because you have no faith. You are not simple. You want to be the seer. But you are not the seer. That'92s the whole trouble.

So I should just give it up?

Gour Govinda Swami: Yes! Give up everything! Just throw it out! Throw it out! Make your heart clean and open. Jesus Christ said, '93Empty thyself. I will fill thee.'94 But you are not emptying. Your heart is full to the brim with crookedness, duplicity and enviousness - all nasty things. How can he fill you? There is no space. Empty yourself. Throw it out! Then you will get.

[From an evening program in Lansing, Michigan on 28 October 1991][/quote]

It is because of instructions like these that I took to Buddhism.[br]

[br]I find such instructions to be extremely abstract, impossible to intentionally act upon. Christianity is full of such instructions. Frustrated with it, I concluded that one would have to be nothing short but enlightened to act upon them - that one would have to be beyond anger, greed, illusion, lust, hatred, beyond any effects of birth, aging, illness and death in their various forms. Buddhism promises such an attainment, and I took to Buddhism with the plan to "become enlightened first", so that then I could act on those instructions given by theists - because I have felt throughout that I should learn the truth about God and make the correct decision in my actions related to God. After a couple of years of Buddhist practice, I gave up because it was just too hard ...

CC - yes.

Advanced means able to deal with anyone. Communication depends on both sides.

> To me, to have someones associacion may mean a lot, but to the other person, its a mere trifle. The relationship is extremely uneven, one-sided, and sooner or later dissolves.

Again, it has to be maintained by both sides.

You can listen to lectures, read articles...

> With Pascals Wager and mainstream Christianity, for example, one is expected to hold on until the time of death, accepting that despite effort, there may come no realization or benefit whatsoever during ones lifetime.

This is not the experience of Desert Fathers and many other saints from various traditions.

I think you are too concerned with Western pathology and philology. There is no *free will*, you have pay for everything as you know.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]You can listen to lectures, read articles...[/quote]

Sure, and I have been. But as I do so, the tension grows - I wonder how those devotees would respond to me IRL. Would they call me a rascal, would they say my questions are merely challenging and would ignore them, would they say I am wasting their time and that I should leave ... This worries me.[br]

[br][quote]> With Pascals Wager and mainstream Christianity, for example, one is expected to hold on until the time of death, accepting that despite effort, there may come no realization or benefit whatsoever during ones lifetime.

[br]This is not the experience of Desert Fathers and many other saints from various traditions.[/quote]

It may not be their experience, but it is often enough the instruction: "Endure until the end!" "Have no demands and no expectations!"

"What ifs" dont help. Contact someone who inspires you and see what kind of relationship develops.

Enduring is needed in every effort: Nanakorobi Yaoki, Jinsei Wa Kore Kara Da. "To fall seven times, to rise eight times - life starts from now."

No demands: Dont try to see Krsna but act in a way He wants to see you. (BSST)

Devotee: How can someone develop simplicity?

Gour Govinda Swami: Associate with a simple sadhu.

Gaura Govinda Swami: Katha Upanisad says:

nayam atma pravacena labhyo na medhaya na bahuna srutena yam evaisa vrnute tena labhyas tasyaisa atma vivrnute tanum svam

The Supreme Self can never be known by any amount of argument, reasoning, intelligence, or by much hearing. To those whom He chooses, however, He may reveal His personal form.

If someone is crying for Krsna, Paramatma knows. Then Paramatma assumes a body and appears. When He appears externally he is guru. "Tanu" means body. Vivrnute tanum svam- He assumes a body and is known as caitya-guru. Therefore I say, cry,cry,cry! Paramatma will know, "Now he is crying for Me." In this regard, sadhu-sanga in most important. And that means a real sadhu in the true sense, not a hypocrite sadhu, not a bogus sadhu- a real sadhu. "Guru" means heavy, not laghu. These words have their meanings and you should understand them. If you really meet guru then you association with laghus will be bitter. Thats a most important thing. Thats the test who is guru.

"Laghu" means material things. You are associating with material poets, material politicians, materially wealthy persons, and materially learned persons. They are laghus. When you associate with a sadhu and get his krpa then automatically the taste will be bitter and you will no longer like to associate with laghus. You should associate with a real sadhu. Sadhu-krpa, then mercy of sadhu, is powerful. It is a most important thing. It is said, vaisnava- krpaye tare sarva siddhi- If you can get the mercy of a sadhu then you will achieve all perfection. Moreover, it must be with a real sadhu, a sadhu is the true sense of the term. Not a hypocrite or bogus sadhu or kali-cela! They are only posing like sadhu. If a genuine sadhu casts his merciful glance on you then you have it!

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

One example of simple and non-simple.

There was a transcendental discourse being held in a nearby town. One old lady and her daughter-in-law walked to hear it. To get there, they had to cross over a river. On the way, the tide was low. During the lecture, the sadhu explained that chanting the holy name of Hari would save one from all dangers. The old lady was not simple but the daughter in law was, so she began chanting Lord Haris names. One the way home, the river had risen and to cross it, they had to wade in water up to the neck. The young lady was going faster, while the old lady was going slower. Suddenly the old lady realized she was being swept away. She called for the daughter in law to come help her. Turning behind and seeing the sudden trouble the daughter in law was only able to advise the old lady to chant Hari! To this, the old lady said, "Who are YOU to instruct me?" She refused to chant and was carried away.

Now apply this instruction to understanding of BBT books (amateurish and speculated, non-simple 1st ed. by Hayagriva vs. restored to transcripts 2nd ed. by JAS). This is my heresy&aparadha detection test.

Yes this is one that reminds me of the three different classes of intelligence.

1st Class) Hears from others that fire burns and never sticks his hand in it or hears that smoking is bad and never takes up the bad habit or
hears the absolute truth from someone who has walked the path, a true self realized soul in full knowledge and follows without ever looking back.

2nd Class) Hears from others that fire burns, sticks his hand in just to make sure and hell yes it burns and decides not to do that again or
ditto for smoking...ditto for following the instructions from a real Vaisnava Saint.

3rd Class) A no brainer hears from others that fire burns, sticks his hand in, repeatedly forgets the pain of the last experience and sticks his hand in again and again,
ditto for smoking...ditto for following the instructions from a real Vaisnava Saint.

As most of us were never born into a pure vaisnava family most of us are less than 3rd class...this fact is held up by realizing how many devotees
took initiation/association from Srila Prabhupada and how many are still around.

As far as hearing from someone that fire burns but deciding to stick your hand in the fire and burn your hand anyway simply because it was someone elses idea
and not yours is borderline madness...but I guess we are all mad in this hell house, mad after sense gratification, the modes, mind & false ego has so much
control over ones life yet most people would swear black and blue thats its their own decision to take certain actions. Its not until you make it into the mode of goodness (and get some instructions from a real Vaisnava Sadhu) can you start to see the subtle energies (modes) and the working of the false ego and the mind.

So from a Vaisnava point of view while the jiva remains covered by the modes of material nature, he has no free will. Srila Prabhpuda often quoted the scenario of the sick people in a hospital, the sick cannot administer care to themselves they need a physician who is aware of their condition to administer some medicine.
Thats what the saints and sadhus are trying to do (the real ones) unfortunately because we are less than 3rd class we prefer to watch tv or waste our lives with some other materialistic pastime.

Srila Prabhupada would also say just like in the hospital quite often the treatment sometimes feels worse than the disease but after you are cured of the disease you cannot understand why you didnt take the medicine earlier. I guess we are all so diseased with material life that the taking up of spiritual practices feels like poison
but Srila Prabhupada tells us that in the end it will be like nectar.

So by following the sadhana program of rising early, chanting sixteen rounds, avoiding meat and intoxicants and bad association (other people who are covered by the modes) it elevates you into the mode of goodness and beyond. Its at that point when you study the scriptures with the guidance of a true Vaisnava Sadhu you will make real spiritual progress. Its a science just like Srila Prabhupada used to say.

[quote][cite] maah!:[/cite]All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

One example of simple and non-simple.

There was a transcendental discourse being held in a nearby town. One old lady and her daughter-in-law walked to hear it. To get there, they had to cross over a river. On the way, the tide was low. During the lecture, the sadhu explained that chanting the holy name of Hari would save one from all dangers. The old lady was not simple but the daughter in law was, so she began chanting Lord Haris names. One the way home, the river had risen and to cross it, they had to wade in water up to the neck. The young lady was going faster, while the old lady was going slower. Suddenly the old lady realized she was being swept away. She called for the daughter in law to come help her. Turning behind and seeing the sudden trouble the daughter in law was only able to advise the old lady to chant Hari! To this, the old lady said, "Who are YOU to instruct me?" She refused to chant and was carried away.[/quote]

What does this story have to do with the scenario presented in the OP?[br]

In the story you post, the old lady _asked_ the younger one for help. This is not the case in the OP scenario. The OP scenario is one where help/advice is given without being asked for.[br]

[br]Often, giving unsolicited advice is a way people use to get control over others, often for some selfish motive.[br]

[br]Has it never happened to you that you took someones (unsolicited) advice, and then this person considered you infinitely indebted to them, always reminding you of how lost youd be without their help and how you owe all kinds of things to them?

[quote][cite] manasi_seva:[/cite]Yes this is one that reminds me of the three different classes of intelligence.

1st Class) Hears from others that fire burns and never sticks his hand in it or hears that smoking is bad and never takes up the bad habit or
hears the absolute truth from someone who has walked the path, a true self realized soul in full knowledge and follows without ever looking back.

2nd Class) Hears from others that fire burns, sticks his hand in just to make sure and hell yes it burns and decides not to do that again or
ditto for smoking...ditto for following the instructions from a real Vaisnava Saint.

3rd Class) A no brainer hears from others that fire burns, sticks his hand in, repeatedly forgets the pain of the last experience and sticks his hand in again and again,
ditto for smoking...ditto for following the instructions from a real Vaisnava Saint.

As most of us were never born into a pure vaisnava family most of us are less than 3rd class...this fact is held up by realizing how many devotees
took initiation/association from Srila Prabhupada and how many are still around.

As far as hearing from someone that fire burns but deciding to stick your hand in the fire and burn your hand anyway simply because it was someone elses idea
and not yours is borderline madness...but I guess we are all mad in this hell house, mad after sense gratification, the modes, mind & false ego has so much
control over ones life yet most people would swear black and blue thats its their own decision to take certain actions. Its not until you make it into the mode of goodness (and get some instructions from a real Vaisnava Sadhu) can you start to see the subtle energies (modes) and the working of the false ego and the mind.

So from a Vaisnava point of view while the jiva remains covered by the modes of material nature, he has no free will. Srila Prabhpuda often quoted the scenario of the sick people in a hospital, the sick cannot administer care to themselves they need a physician who is aware of their condition to administer some medicine.
Thats what the saints and sadhus are trying to do (the real ones) unfortunately because we are less than 3rd class we prefer to watch tv or waste our lives with some other materialistic pastime.[/quote]

Could you provide any reference that the same principles that apply to the acquisition of material knowledge, apply also to the acquisition of proper spiritual knowledge?[br]

[br]There is such a variety of advice on offer as to what one should do in terms of spirituality, that I fail to see how a principle like "Dont stick your hand into the fire!" would apply. Its not like it is self-evident to everyone where true happiness is, or what our true self is and so on. In fact, there is a vast range of teachings on these topics, many of them are mutually exclusive. How is a lay, run-of-the-mill person supposed to choose among them? Especially since most of them are delivered in the tone of "And if you dont do as I tell you, you are a bad person and should suffer terribly."

giving unsolicited advice is a way people use to get control over others, often for some selfish motive.

Ha ha. It is true. Desire to get attention of Sri Mahaprabhu is very selfish. Preacher is one who takes away your free will to suffer, and you have to use the money you used for your suffering in Krishnas service.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]"What ifs" dont help. Contact someone who inspires you and see what kind of relationship develops.[/quote]

I dont feel particularly inspired by anyone, though.[br]

[br][quote]Enduring is needed in every effort: Nanakorobi Yaoki, Jinsei Wa Kore Kara Da. "To fall seven times, to rise eight times - life starts from now."[/quote]

Endure - but for what?[br]

[br][quote]No demands: Dont try to see Krsna but act in a way He wants to see you. (BSST)[/quote]

I do not know how Krishna wants to see me. I do not have His direct associacion to know these things, nor am I omniscient. I dont know if the Vedic scriptures and the disciplic succession are correctly delivering His instructions. Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not. It seems to me I would have to be very advanced, if not omniscient, to actually know what Krishna wants.

[quote][cite] borokrsnadasa:[/cite]giving unsolicited advice is a way people use to get control over others, often for some selfish motive.

Ha ha. It is true. Desire to get attention of Sri Mahaprabhu is very selfish. Preacher is one who takes away your free will to suffer, and you have to use the money you used for your suffering in Krishnas service.[/quote]

How do you know it is in fact in Krishnas service, and not just your imagination?

>It seems to me I would have to be very advanced, if not omniscient, to actually know what Krishna wants.

You got it wrong, one need not to be advanced, one needs to be a simple person, a very simple hearted one to know what krsna wants. "I need to be very advanced, and I will understand what krsna wants", this statement is another declaration of false ego. And till the time it remains there it is hard to understand what krsna wants.

> I dont feel particularly inspired by anyone, though.

Then keep on listening.

> Endure - but for what?

To get to the desired destination, to get a desired thing, you name it.

> I do not know how Krishna wants to see me. I do not have His direct associacion to know these things, nor am I omniscient.

Even in His direct association you wouldnt know unless He told you. His words are in sastras.

> I dont know if the Vedic scriptures and the disciplic succession are correctly delivering His instructions. Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not.

No. Theyre svayam vyakta, self evident. The result of the divya jnana is perceivable in sadhus even by materialists. Its called metanoia in Greek. Theres really no place left for agnosticism. Its a position of ajnana. Therefore the prayer to the guru goes -

om ajnana timirandhasya jnananjana-salakaya
caksur unmilitam yena tasmai sri-gurave namah

So were back to the humble acceptance of siksa, pariprasna and seva. Theres no way around them, regardless of a spiritual or material tradition (crafts, arts).

> It seems to me I would have to be very advanced, if not omniscient, to actually know what Krishna wants.

I second dwellers answer.

Baker,

You actually make a very interesting point, as you can see most of the knowledge on offer here is a regurgitation of what Srila Prabhupada said, I guess that is because some of us have met Srila Prabhupada or atleast have read his books and have found nothing else that has affected our lives so deeply. But its a dam good question. How do we know what we know?

You say "Could you provide any reference that the same principles that apply to the acquisition of material knowledge, apply also to the acquisition of proper spiritual knowledge?"

Material Knowledge as acquired in the top universities of the planet like Cambridge and Harvard are based on Epistemology.

Epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief or in other words What is knowledge? How is knowledge acquired? What do people know? How do we know what we know? or another view of Epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies knowledge. It attempts to answer the basic question: what distinguishes true (adequate) knowledge from false (inadequate) knowledge? Practically, this question translates into issues of scientific methodology: how can one develop theories or models that are better than competing theories?

Ontology is the theory of being and epistemology is the theory of knowledge. Plato is generally said to be doing ontology because he argues that what really exists are eternal, unchanging forms. The everyday world are imitations, or reflections of these forms. This is quite a different ontology than one that says the universe is only made up of quarks.

Now spritual life takes a few different twists and turns in the Brahma Madhva Gaudia Sampridiya (which is the family tree stemming from Krishna down to Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and includes Iskcon) and also many Bharat (India) spiritual based systems of knowledge are opposite to Epistemology, they accept the word of the scripture as written by Vasudeva in Faith, this is not different from the old ways or religions prior to and including Christianity all of these are passing knowledge down via a guru or teacher system along with written (Shastric) reference.

But at the end of days these are all words...its like asking someone what does a foodstuff taste like that you have never tasted, say for example a mango, you will
get all sorts of descriptions and some will say its the king of fruits while others will say its over rated. Ultimately you will have to get your feet wet and jump in..and try it for yourself. Yes there many philosophies and many paths and these days everyone is their own self styled philosopher, even the taxi driver has his own view on the universe ... OMG! LMAO!

What I find that helps is to take a a deep breath. hold it for about 20 seconds..then breath out slowly repeat this several times until your mind shifts from the outside world to your breathing...then laugh...laugh like you have never laughed before...tears will come from your eyes..just becareful u dont piss your pants...Just kidding...the only thing I have found that helps is to take the first step...chant Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare, Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare...my life truly did change after only a few chants...and no matter what I do my old life will never be the same...thank Krishna for that! Oh and also hang on to your sense of humour you will need it! and of course I would highly recommend that you read Srila Prabhupadas books..all of them! I trust him only him and no one else! Buckle up buddy because if your chant the holy name...Kansas city is going bye bye! and it will never be the same!

[quote][cite] dweller-in-peace:[/cite]>It seems to me I would have to be very advanced, if not omniscient, to actually know what Krishna wants.

[br]You got it wrong, one need not to be advanced, one needs to be a simple person, a very simple hearted one to know what krsna wants. "I need to be very advanced, and I will understand what krsna wants", this statement is another declaration of false ego. And till the time it remains there it is hard to understand what krsna wants.[/quote]

Interesting. I suppose considering omniscience or at least substantial advancement to be prerequisite for knowledge of God and His will is connected to the fearful conviction that God is a monster or that doing what God wants will be harmful for ones wellbeing - thus one must be most careful and most knowledgeable when dealing with God, similarly like one has to be careful and knowledgeable when handling a dangerous substance or a rabid dog. Which fits in with the fire and brimstone image of Christianity as I was raised with.[br]

[br]I havent had any of the usual "Christian panic attacks" in weeks, though, which is a bit strange. I am still finding the Vedic descriptions of God to be somehow too fairy-tale like, too playful, too colorful to be true. I am still afraid that eventually, it will turn out that the fire and brimstone Jehovah who will torture people in hell for all eternity with no chance redemption if they dont accept Jesus, is the real God, and Krishna is just a product of wishful thinking and imagination.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> I dont feel particularly inspired by anyone, though.

[br]Then keep on listening.[/quote]

This is novel! A senior devotee once told me, upon hearing that I dont feel inspired by anyone, that perhaps KC isnt for me and that I should look elsewhere. That really angried me.[br]

[br][quote]> Endure - but for what?

[br]To get to the desired destination, to get a desired thing, you name it.[/quote]

I suppose I am not convinced that the goal of Krishna consciousness is worthy or possible.[br]

[br][quote]> I dont know if the Vedic scriptures and the disciplic succession are correctly delivering His instructions. Perhaps they are, perhaps they are not.

[br]No. Theyre svayam vyakta, self evident.[/quote]

They dont seem self-evident to me. But you said that "The result of the divya jnana is perceivable in sadhus even by materialists". So why dont they seem self-evident to me?[br]

[br][quote]The result of the divya jnana is perceivable in sadhus even by materialists. Its called metanoia in Greek.[/quote]

"Metanoia" is new to me. I read the Wikipedia article on it - [br]
"The Greek term for repentance, metanoia, denotes a change of mind, a reorientation, a fundamental transformation of outlook, of an individuals vision of the world and of her/himself, and a new way of loving others and the Universe. In the words of a second-century text, The Shepherd of Hermas, it implies "great understanding," discernment. It involves, that is, not mere regret of past evil but a recognition by a person of a darkened vision of her/his own condition, in which sin, by separating her/him from Deity, has reduced her/him to a divided, autonomous existence, depriving her/him of both her/his natural glory and freedom. "Repentance," says Basil the Great, "is salvation, but lack of understanding is the death of repentance." Repentance thereby acquires a different dimension to mere dwelling on human sinfulness, and becomes the realization of human insufficiency and limitation. Repentance then should not be accompanied by a paroxysm of guilt but by an awareness of ones estrangement from Deity and ones neighbor."[br]

[br]This seems to be similar to the Buddhist notion of samvega, which I am familiar with - "three clusters of feelings at once: the oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that come with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as its normally lived; a chastening sense of our own complacency and foolishness in having let ourselves live so blindly; and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle." (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/affirming.html)[br]

[br][quote]So were back to the humble acceptance of siksa, pariprasna and seva. Theres no way around them, regardless of a spiritual or material tradition (crafts, arts).[/quote]

I am not against this principle. But I do see many problems pertaining to the choice of whom to ask advice from, how to justify that choice, and what to do if the advice doesnt seem to work for me.

Dont ask Bakker. Asking is not an easy thing, just imagine!!! It is interesting to note that there is no such a thing as subjective and objective in vedic logic.

> I suppose considering omniscience or at least substantial advancement to be prerequisite for knowledge of God and His will

This is contradictory. Omniscience means having all knowledge which includes knowledge of God and His will.

> is connected to the fearful conviction that God is a monster or that doing what God wants will be harmful for ones wellbeing - thus one must be most careful and most knowledgeable when dealing with God, similarly like one has to be careful and knowledgeable when handling a dangerous substance or a rabid dog. Which fits in with the fire and brimstone image of Christianity as I was raised with.

Yes, God appears in wrathful forms like Narasimha, identical with YHVH as far as my research goes. Pastimes of the Lord: http://narasimhalila.com/

> I havent had any of the usual "Christian panic attacks" in weeks, though, which is a bit strange.

Fear of hell? From sastra and NDEs its obvious that hell is real but one cant get there undeservingly. And since we have a free will, we choose our future destinations.

> I am still finding the Vedic descriptions of God to be somehow too fairy-tale like, too playful, too colorful to be true.

What about Song of Songs?

> I am still afraid that eventually, it will turn out that the fire and brimstone Jehovah who will torture people in hell for all eternity with no chance redemption if they dont accept Jesus, is the real God, and Krishna is just a product of wishful thinking and imagination.

Didnt I suggest that you should apply the same criteria to all accounts? From a theoretical neutral stance, why to take Jehovah for granted and Krishna as imagination? In fact, theres no clash but thats a matter of a realized knowledge, as I said earlier.

> This is novel! A senior devotee once told me, upon hearing that I dont feel inspired by anyone, that perhaps KC isnt for me and that I should look elsewhere. That really angried me.

How it can be novel if its found all over sastra? Sravanam kirtanam visnoh...

> I suppose I am not convinced that the goal of Krishna consciousness is worthy or possible.

We discussed that earlier. Compare KC and other goals and evaluate them by various criteria.

> They dont seem self-evident to me. But you said that "The result of the divya jnana is perceivable in sadhus even by materialists". So why dont they seem self-evident to me?

I dont know about your experience much. You only mentioned your contact with one namahatta group. This sounds like a quite limited experience. I said there are probably neophyte devotees. But even in their case one should see some differences between them and materialists. The more one knows a devotee the more one can see those differences. By "perceivable even by materialists" I primarily meant the devotees family (if theyre materialists, that is). They know him best and thus can see that he lost his interest in things he did previously. His former friends also tend to leave him. This is the general experience of Vaisnavas, Christians and other theists.

> "Metanoia" is new to me. I read the Wikipedia article on it -

Really? This is one of the main terms in Christian theology.

Samvega sounds like the realization of Gautama Buddha when he met those three persons representing three types of sufferings. This is preliminary to metanoia. Samvega is "no to the material" while metanoia is "yes to the spiritual".

> But I do see many problems pertaining to the choice of whom to ask advice from, how to justify that choice, and what to do if the advice doesnt seem to work for me.

The end of the verse says - upadeksyanti te jnanam jnaninas tattva darsinah. Tattva darsinah, knowers of tattva. Who are they, how do they behave, etc. is explained in the BG.

A spiritual master is recognized as an actual guru when it is seen that he has changed the character of his disciples. (CC 3.3.143 p.)

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> I suppose considering omniscience or at least substantial advancement to be prerequisite for knowledge of God and His will

[br]This is contradictory. Omniscience means having all knowledge which includes knowledge of God and His will.[/quote]

Yes, underlying the prerequisite mentioned above is the notion that humans can or should be on par with God, or even higher.[br]

[br][quote]Yes, God appears in wrathful forms like Narasimha, identical with YHVH as far as my research goes.[/quote]

Yes. But somehow, I feel warmly about Narasimha, but not about Jehovah.[br]

[br][quote]Fear of hell?[/quote]

No, the panic attacks were to the effect of intensely fearing eternal damnation if I dont accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior, and dont become baptized in the right Christian church, and instead take some other religious path.[br]

[br][quote]What about Song of Songs?[/quote]

Is one of those texts we were not supposed to read, just like we were discouraged to read the story of Job. I have read them, but with the thought that I was actually not supposed to.[br]

[br][quote]Didnt I suggest that you should apply the same criteria to all accounts? From a theoretical neutral stance, why to take Jehovah for granted and Krishna as imagination? In fact, theres no clash but thats a matter of a realized knowledge, as I said earlier.[/quote]

For one, at the end of the day, I am left with Christians and atheists, not devotees. Not that I am friends with Christians and atheists, they are just the only people I come into contact with where live. And Christians, and even Western atheists, accept Jehovah as the one and only true God. (In my experience, Western atheists have found associacion with Christianity far more acceptable/normal than with some other theism.)
[br]For two, I see no way to move from that theoretical neutral stance.[br]

[br][quote]> This is novel! A senior devotee once told me, upon hearing that I dont feel inspired by anyone, that perhaps KC isnt for me and that I should look elsewhere.

[br]How it can be novel if its found all over sastra? Sravanam kirtanam visnoh... [/quote]

Most devotees I have spoken to about this have more or less made the point that by then, by how much I have heard and read that far, I should already be convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that I should already have a lot more faith than I do, that I should already wear a sari and so on. And that if by that time that they talked with me, I was not yet convinced, then this is probably a sign that "KC isnt for me" - "If I havent become convinced by now, I never will".[br]
Werent they right?[br]

[br][quote]Compare KC and other goals and evaluate them by various criteria.[/quote]

Sure, I can do that, and have done so, but so what? My doing so wont make those goals true or right. Perhaps I just havent accepted yet that with everything I do, I may be risking eternal damnation - and that this is just how life on earth is.[br]

[br]When you took up the path of Krishna consciousness, were you never afraid that you were doing the wrong thing, and that perhaps you are risking eternal damnation? Have you always had the confidence that you understand scriptures and preachers well enough to discern what to fear and what not to fear?[br]

[quote]> "Metanoia" is new to me.

[br]Really? This is one of the main terms in Christian theology.[/quote]

I dont recall hearing the Greek word. "Repentance" - yes, but I never really understood what the word means. From observing other people who "repented", it seemed to me that "repentance" means one is supposed to feel profoundly bad about oneself, to the point of physical self-flagellation. Catholics sometimes say their prayers at night like this - they kneel, and beat themselves on the chest where the heart is, and repeat "Mea culpa!" It always seemed to me that thei height of repentance would be to take a knife and stab oneself, and that unless one does so, one is not really repenting.[br]

[br][quote]Samvega sounds like the realization of Gautama Buddha when he met those three persons representing three types of sufferings. This is preliminary to metanoia. Samvega is "no to the material" while metanoia is "yes to the spiritual".[/quote]

There is a pair to samvega - namely pasada, a sense of confidence and serene clarity. Pasada is what keeps samvega from turning into despair. It seems metanoia is a combination of samvega and pasada.[br]

[br][quote]The end of the verse says - upadeksyanti te jnanam jnaninas tattva darsinah. Tattva darsinah, knowers of tattva. Who are they, how do they behave, etc. is explained in the BG.[/quote]

There seems to be a double bind: One the one hand, there is the notion that one cannot understand the BG without the proper guidance. On the other hand, there is the notion that in order to choose the proper guidance, one has to understand the BG. How is this bind to be resolved?[br]

[br]I apologize for the long post.

Krishna conciousness is actually very simple....for the simple hearted.However my bhaktine baker you seem intent on making it very differcult to taste and incorporate intimately in your daily lifestyle.So rather than just submit to the sankirtan process of congregational chanting hour after hour amongst sincere devotees you hover continually on the mental platform.Last week i went on a midnight harinam party ,with thirty to forty devotees to welcome in the new year.We ecstatically danced and chanted amongst thousands of drunkin revelers.My 1 year old daughter danced openly and freely amongst the huge crowds.She stole their hearts repeatedly.For 3 hours we danced up and down Queen street,until 12.30 into the new year....Then feeling that i was showing my age playing the mrdanga drum ....i gave it to a far younger devotee and collapsed in to my car.However i was completely awash and humbled by sri chaitanya mahaprabhus sweet mercy and transcendental reciprocation with me personally......So go on harinam ...make the devottees your freinds by submitting to the transcendental process of congregational chanting of hare krishna.

> humans can or should be on par with God, or even higher.

Understanding of God can be done only in godly consciousness. Godly doesnt mean equal to God in all respects.
From tattva pov its not possible, only from rasa pov.

> I feel warmly about Narasimha, but not about Jehovah.

Why? I guess you only know about peaceful side of Narasimha (with Prahlada M. and Laksmi).

> No, the panic attacks were to the effect of intensely fearing eternal damnation if I dont accept Jesus as my Lord and Savior, and dont become baptized in the right Christian church, and instead take some other religious path.

Thats what I meant. You didnt research this issue from interreligious pov. You only accepted what your church/es told you.

> Is one of those texts we were not supposed to read, just like we were discouraged to read the story of Job. I have read them, but with the thought that I was actually not supposed to.

Why not to read them with a proper commentary? If someone cant give such a commentary, he tends to forbid reading the text. It means both the teacher and the disciples are kanisthas.
Otoh, Srila Prabhupada presented SB 10 with his commentary (KB), not forbidding or discounting any of its parts.

> And Christians, and even Western atheists, accept Jehovah as the one and only true God. (In my experience, Western atheists have found associacion with Christianity far more acceptable/normal than with some other theism.)

Western atheists hardly know about any other theisms. Their arguments fail in front of Visnu/Krsna and theistic Vedanta.

> For two, I see no way to move from that theoretical neutral stance.

I did that by my interreligious and intercultural study.

> Werent they right?

I wouldnt say so. Some people need more time for thinking than others. Also, the ajnata sukriti differs in each person who makes a change into a devotee.

> My doing so wont make those goals true or right.

Then choose objective criteria. Quality and quantity of knowledge, levels of attainment (karma, jnana, bhakti), gunas, etc.

> Perhaps I just havent accepted yet that with everything I do, I may be risking eternal damnation - and that this is just how life on earth is.

Imho, youve accepted it to some extent since youre afraid of it.

> When you took up the path of Krishna consciousness, were you never afraid that you were doing the wrong thing, and that perhaps you are risking eternal damnation? Have you always had the confidence that you understand scriptures and preachers well enough to discern what to fear and what not to fear?

I had the advantage of not undergoing a kanistha-type religious persuasion.
When I started reading SPs books, they were in sync with my previous experiences from other traditions. Everything started to make more and more sense, like a finishing a puzzle. And thats not only mine experience.
Any remaining doubts were clarified by my study under the guidance of Bhaktiananda M. and with his blessings.

Real repentance is metanoia. "Dont sin anymore!"

> It seems metanoia is a combination of samvega and pasada.

In Southern Buddhism theres no developed spiritual dimension so thats not a full-fledged theistic metanoia.

> One the one hand, there is the notion that one cannot understand the BG without the proper guidance. On the other hand, there is the notion that in order to choose the proper guidance, one has to understand the BG. How is this bind to be resolved?

Easily, by gradual progress.
First guru is called vartma pradarsaka, "the path shower". He recommend BG as a book of knowledge worthy to check out. Then we study it on our own.
Second guru is siksa, "instructor". He explains the BG as far as he can, from gss pov. He brings us to diksa guru, "initiator", the third one. We graduate in our BG study under his guidance. Siksa and diksa may be the same person.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Understanding of God can be done only in godly consciousness. Godly doesnt mean equal to God in all respects.
From tattva pov its not possible, only from rasa pov.[/quote]

I see. This makes for a very different approach to knowing God than Western empiricists are proposing.[br]

[br][quote]Why? I guess you only know about peaceful side of Narasimha (with Prahlada M. and Laksmi).[/quote]

Not at all. Its actually those images of tearing people up and such that I like best. In Christian imagery, I have also had an attraction for those images of hell and desperation. I just didnt know what to do with Jesus in the middle of it all, and couldnt accept the notion of eternal damnation. "Annihilating the miscreants" - I have always liked that.[br]

[br][quote]You didnt research this issue from interreligious pov. You only accepted what your church/es told you.[/quote]

I have done some research, but it was all in the spirit of "research is wrong" - another thing I was taught by Christians, and yes, it appears I have accepted it as the rule.[br]

[br][quote]Otoh, Srila Prabhupada presented SB 10 with his commentary (KB), not forbidding or discounting any of its parts.[/quote]

What does "KB" mean here?[br]

[br][quote]Western atheists hardly know about any other theisms. Their arguments fail in front of Visnu/Krsna and theistic Vedanta.[/quote]

Yes, Western atheism is small fry as far as their arguments go, but they can be incredibly persistent.[br]

[br][quote]> For two, I see no way to move from that theoretical neutral stance.

[br]I did that by my interreligious and intercultural study.[/quote]

How did you approach that study? Did you take college courses?[br]
(I assume your studying under the guidance of Bhaktiananda Maharaja began later, after the interreligious and intercultural studies.)[br]

[br][quote]I wouldnt say so. Some people need more time for thinking than others.[/quote]

I have a fast brain, but I cant think fast ...[br]

[br][quote]Then choose objective criteria. Quality and quantity of knowledge, levels of attainment (karma, jnana, bhakti), gunas, etc.[/quote]

Yes ... Keeping track of how many rounds I have chanted, how many verses I memorized, how much other work I got done, how many flowers I planted ...[br]

[br][quote]In Southern Buddhism theres no developed spiritual dimension so thats not a full-fledged theistic metanoia.[/quote]

No, its not. My experience of Buddhism (strongly focused on the Pali Canon) is that it is a desperate measure in a time when theists cannot be trusted.[br]

[br][quote]> One the one hand, there is the notion that one cannot understand the BG without the proper guidance. On the other hand, there is the notion that in order to choose the proper guidance, one has to understand the BG. How is this bind to be resolved?

[br]Easily, by gradual progress.
First guru is called vartma pradarsaka, "the path shower". He recommend BG as a book of knowledge worthy to check out. Then we study it on our own.
Second guru is siksa, "instructor". He explains the BG as far as he can, from gss pov. He brings us to diksa guru, "initiator", the third one. We graduate in our BG study under his guidance. Siksa and diksa may be the same person.[/quote]

I wanted to say something, but I just had another one of those experiences where I cant remember what my initial problem was. It has happened to me several times that I had a problem with some verse, went over it many times, discussed it, wrote the problem down, but at some point, things just made sense somehow and I could not, for the life of me, relate to my initial problem anymore ...

> This makes for a very different approach to knowing God than Western empiricists are proposing.

Definitely.

> Not at all. Its actually those images of tearing people up and such that I like best. In Christian imagery, I have also had an attraction for those images of hell and desperation. I just didnt know what to do with Jesus in the middle of it all, and couldnt accept the notion of eternal damnation. "Annihilating the miscreants" - I have always liked that.

Its only for the incorrigible ones. To annihilate someones demoniac mentality, as Sri Caitanya does in Kali yuga, is actually harder.

> What does "KB" mean here?

Krsna Book.

> Yes, Western atheism is small fry as far as their arguments go, but they can be incredibly persistent.

If someone doesnt realize or accept his defeat, hes persistent to continue and makes a fool out of himself unless the others are like him. Otoh, the defeated Indian philosophers were intelligent enough to become disciples of debate winners.

> How did you approach that study? Did you take college courses?
(I assume your studying under the guidance of Bhaktiananda Maharaja began later, after the interreligious and intercultural studies.)

It was the result of reading some of his articles, exchanging many emails, reading more articles while looking up references, comparing concepts and symbols, and digesting all of it. It gave me a clear and meaningful view of general history, not just of religions and cultures. Our Connections section gives an overview.

> I have a fast brain, but I cant think fast ...

Hm? What does the brain (actually mind and intelligence) do fast then, if not thinking?

> Yes ... Keeping track of how many rounds I have chanted, how many verses I memorized, how much other work I got done, how many flowers I planted ...

No, thats something else. I meant criteria for various paths.

> My experience of Buddhism (strongly focused on the Pali Canon) is that it is a desperate measure in a time when theists cannot be trusted.

Fortunately, Kali yuga is not that far yet.

> I wanted to say something, but I just had another one of those experiences where I cant remember what my initial problem was. It has happened to me several times that I had a problem with some verse, went over it many times, discussed it, wrote the problem down, but at some point, things just made sense somehow and I could not, for the life of me, relate to my initial problem anymore ...

The problem got solved by Paramatma. Thats what the story of prof. M. Malaviya and BSST is about.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Its only for the incorrigible ones. To annihilate someones demoniac mentality, as Sri Caitanya does in Kali yuga, is actually harder.[/quote]

Why are they _incorrigible_? Are they intent on opposing God for all eternity?[br]

[br]Krsna Book. - I see, thank you.[br]

[br][quote]If someone doesnt realize or accept his defeat, hes persistent to continue and makes a fool out of himself unless the others are like him.[/quote]

Yes, it takes two to have a bad conversation![br]

[br][quote]Otoh, the defeated Indian philosophers were intelligent enough to become disciples of debate winners.[/quote]

So there are real, historical examples of people who chose a different spiritual path based on the debates they have engaged in.
Conversely, I often hear from people who are into spirituality, including devotees, that debates dont bring anything, cant lead to a change, and therefore should be avoided. But perhaps that is because these people who say such things are themselves persistent fools like those in the previous paragraph ...[br]

[br][quote]It was the result of reading some of his articles, exchanging many emails, reading more articles while looking up references, comparing concepts and symbols, and digesting all of it. It gave me a clear and meaningful view of general history, not just of religions and cultures. Our Connections section gives an overview.[/quote]

Have you taken up these studies before or after initiation?[br]

[br]I have checked out the Connections section - there is quite a lot there! Like I said, I have done some intercultural and interreligious research, but never had the confidence to evaluate the findings myself much. Besides my inner Christian telling me that research is wrong, I was also discouraged from this sort of empirical research witnessing the sheer amount of matter I would have to study. So for me, it all comes down to trust - trusting my intuition, trusting empiricism and logic, trusting the authors who wrote those books. And I dont find myself able to trust any of these when it comes to matters of life and death.[br]

[br][quote]Hm? What does the brain (actually mind and intelligence) do fast then, if not thinking?[/quote]

I dont have one-pointed intelligence, my mind will go off on tangents or engage in many implications or consider many factors. It makes for very inefficient thinking.[br]
A brain with an "average" IQ is simply not able to work in so many directions, this is how "average" people seem to have it so much easier, seem to be so much more focused and sure of themselves.[br]

[br][quote]No, thats something else. I meant criteria for various paths.[/quote]

I see, we have talked about this before. But I havent yet excluded the possibility that "my true nature" and "how things truly, objectively are" is completely different from my current ideas about them.[br]

[br]For example, I have been mostly a vegetarian from age 15 to age 30. By age 30, I became so frustrated with my moral principles that I concluded that perhaps they are indeed wrong, and that other people who told me to eat meat and who praised eating meat, are actually right. That in order to be truly happy, I need to do things that I now find morally repugnant. So I in fact started to eat meat again, for a year and a half. I was disgusted, and not that I became any happier. But I thought this disgust and unhappiness were because I have not gone the full course of "being normal", and that I would also have to take to drinking coffee, casual sex, alcohol and so on, whatever "normal people" do - and then I would be happy and have the proper view of reality.[br]

[br]Evaluating different paths seems to be meaningful only if one is sure of ones values that inform the criteria by which one evaluates those paths. And I am not sure of those values.[br]

[br]So I am also confused by the behavior of some devotees. For example, they preach about Krishna and love for Krishna, and 24/7 thinking of Krishna, but they eat prasadam from disposable plastic plates, when they likely could have brought their own eco-friendly regular plates that can be used over and over again. Or they dont bow to the altar, or sit showing their crotch to the altar (wearing tight pants).
Does this mean they are so advanced that they are beyond such concerns?[br]

[br][quote]The problem got solved by Paramatma.[/quote]

But I dont know if this is so. I havent realized the Paramatma.
Am I supposed to think and say that "the problem got solved by Paramatma", even when I dont know this is what happened?[br]

[br][quote]Thats what the story of prof. M. Malaviya and BSST is about.[/quote]

I looked up some info on Madan Mohan Malaviya, the great Indian educator and founder of the University of Benares, but found no reference to his connections with Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. What is the story about them?

> Why are they _incorrigible_? Are they intent on opposing God for all eternity?

They persist in their opposition to the Lord. But eternity is a long time. They may change after some time. They have free will like everyone else.

> So there are real, historical examples of people who chose a different spiritual path based on the debates they have engaged in.

Sri Caitanya in CC is the prime example. SP also wanted his disciples to learn how to argue. Therefore he invited people to come to visit him and he discussed with them in the presence of his disciples. He asked especially his leaders to come and hear.

> Conversely, I often hear from people who are into spirituality, including devotees, that debates dont bring anything, cant lead to a change, and therefore should be avoided. But perhaps that is because these people who say such things are themselves persistent fools like those in the previous paragraph ...

No, if theyre Vedic in nature. Those people may just not know about it.

> Have you taken up these studies before or after initiation?

I havent been formally initiated, only accepted as a diksa candidate. But my guru later left ISKCON.
My study with Maharaja happened several years ago.

> Besides my inner Christian telling me that research is wrong,

Many Christians do research. Thats not forbidden.

> So for me, it all comes down to trust - trusting my intuition, trusting empiricism and logic, trusting the authors who wrote those books. And I dont find myself able to trust any of these when it comes to matters of life and death.

So the only remaining pramana is sabda. 8)

Actually, one quite powerful evidence is not only the life but also the death of devotees. I have a collection of accounts of devotees leaving their body and they speak for themselves. This is where empirical and sastric information are in sync in plain view.

> I see, we have talked about this before. But I havent yet excluded the possibility that "my true nature" and "how things truly, objectively are" is completely different from my current ideas about them.

The complete alignment happens when we reach pure KC. Until then our ideas may or may not fit the reality. In either way theyre not fully realized by direct experience (divya pratyaksa).

> For example, I have been mostly a vegetarian from age 15 to age 30. By age 30, I became so frustrated with my moral principles that I concluded that perhaps they are indeed wrong, and that other people who told me to eat meat and who praised eating meat, are actually right. That in order to be truly happy, I need to do things that I now find morally repugnant. So I in fact started to eat meat again, for a year and a half. I was disgusted, and not that I became any happier. But I thought this disgust and unhappiness were because I have not gone the full course of "being normal", and that I would also have to take to drinking coffee, casual sex, alcohol and so on, whatever "normal people" do - and then I would be happy and have the proper view of reality.

This makes little sense. "Normal people" arent happy in the first place since their "reality" is temporary. They try to "hold sand in their hands".

> Evaluating different paths seems to be meaningful only if one is sure of ones values that inform the criteria by which one evaluates those paths. And I am not sure of those values.

What I listed are Krsnas objective criteria. If you think you can find others, no problem.

> So I am also confused by the behavior of some devotees. For example, they preach about Krishna and love for Krishna, and 24/7 thinking of Krishna, but they eat prasadam from disposable plastic plates, when they likely could have brought their own eco-friendly regular plates that can be used over and over again. Or they dont bow to the altar, or sit showing their crotch to the altar (wearing tight pants). Does this mean they are so advanced that they are beyond such concerns?

You shouldnt be confused. These are minor problems. They just are not aware of them.

> But I dont know if this is so. I havent realized the Paramatma. Am I supposed to think and say that "the problem got solved by Paramatma", even when I dont know this is what happened?

Regardless of what we may think, thats how He works. See BG 15.15.

> I looked up some info on Madan Mohan Malaviya, the great Indian educator and founder of the University of Benares, but found no reference to his connections with Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. What is the story about them?

Ive posted it here before: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/bhaktiyoga/change.htm#8

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]They persist in their opposition to the Lord. But eternity is a long time. They may change after some time. They have free will like everyone else.[/quote]

When a miscreant is annihilated, what does that mean? That that particular body of the person who opposes the Lord is incapacitated?[br]

[br][quote]Sri Caitanya in CC is the prime example. SP also wanted his disciples to learn how to argue. Therefore he invited people to come to visit him and he discussed with them in the presence of his disciples. He asked especially his leaders to come and hear.[/quote]

Allright.[br]

[br][quote]No, if theyre Vedic in nature. Those people may just not know about it.[/quote]

There is a famous letter where Srila Prabhupada spoke on how there is a place for philosophical speculation in Krishna consciousness (Bombay 21 January, 1972).[br]

I think there are several verses in the BG that support this too. For example: BG 9.34: "Engage your mind always in thinking of Me;" BG 11.55: "he who makes Me the supreme goal of his life /.../ he certainly comes to Me".[br]

[br][quote]I havent been formally initiated, only accepted as a diksa candidate. But my guru later left ISKCON.
My study with Maharaja happened several years ago.[/quote]

I see.[br]

[br][quote]So the only remaining pramana is sabda. 8)[/quote]

Yes, this is the conclusion I have reached too. Now the only question is to identify which scripture that purports to be sabda, indeed is sabda.[br]

[br][quote]Actually, one quite powerful evidence is not only the life but also the death of devotees. I have a collection of accounts of devotees leaving their body and they speak for themselves. This is where empirical and sastric information are in sync in plain view.[/quote]

I cant imagine what that evidence is like? Is it about what those devotees were doing just before leaving the body, what the left body looked like ...?[br]

[br][quote]The complete alignment happens when we reach pure KC. Until then our ideas may or may not fit the reality. In either way theyre not fully realized by direct experience (divya pratyaksa).[/quote]

Some theists, but also atheists, argue that unless one has attained the goal of a religious practice, one might as well be completely wrong - "Unless one has reached pure Krishna consciousness, one is to be considered a plain run-of-the-mill person, completely ignorant of the Absolute truth." What would you say to that?[br]

[br][quote]This makes little sense. "Normal people" arent happy in the first place since their "reality" is temporary. They try to "hold sand in their hands".[/quote]

Actually, the theists and the advocates of meat eating, casual sex etc. have something in common: 1. they both claim that I am not acting in line with my true nature, 2. they both claim that if I tried harder and kept to their instructions more consistently, then Id be happy; 3. they both claim that the misery I have felt on each path is irrelevant and that I should pursue the path anyway, until I reach happiness.[br]

[br]I have tried each path, and I have been miserable on both. Theoretically, either could be the right path. Since I havent fully invested myself in either, I cant make judgments about them. But nor do I see a way to fully invest myself in either of them. How could I choose between them, especially given that I have experienced no happiness or satisfaction in either?[br]

[br][quote]> Evaluating different paths seems to be meaningful only if one is sure of ones values that inform the criteria by which one evaluates those paths. And I am not sure of those values.

[br]What I listed are Krsnas objective criteria. If you think you can find others, no problem.[/quote]

No, I meant that I am allowing for the possibility that the values I now hold may actually be completely wrong. This brings with it a host of problems. It is sometimes said that it is possible to be so open-minded that ones brain falls out. I think this is happening to me.[br]

[br][quote]You shouldnt be confused. These are minor problems. They just are not aware of them.[/quote]

But these people have it in them to talk down to me and to treat me like I cant count to three. They appear like they really know what they are talking about, like they have personal realization of everything they say.[br]
As a run-of-the-mill person, I do not have the ability to directly distinguish who is advanced and who is not, all I can go by are some external signs, which, however, may or may not be definitive indicators of advancement.[br]

[br]This is important to me inasmuch as choosing whom to associate with and whom to obey is concerned. If those devotees are indeed self-realized, even though externally, they may display some disrespectful behaviors, and even though I dont feel inspired by those devotees, I should still associate with them, is this not so?[br]

[br][quote]> But I dont know if this is so. I havent realized the Paramatma. Am I supposed to think and say that "the problem got solved by Paramatma", even when I dont know this is what happened?

[br]Regardless of what we may think, thats how He works. See BG 15.15.[/quote]

(I know this verse by heart.) My point is whether as aspirants/devotees, are we supposed to declare something as true, even if we havent realized it?[br]

[br]I have book knowledge of many things, but I make an effort to never claim it to be the truth or that I know it to be the truth. Hence so many "as far as I understood", "I think", "it seems to me" and source references in my speech. [br]
In Buddhism, we were taught to never speak beyond our competence/realization, and I am still keeping to this. Even though it does give my thinking and speaking a sense of relativism (and I suspect this has earned me quite a bit of criticism).[br]

[br][quote]Ive posted it here before: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/bhaktiyoga/change.htm#8[/quote]

Oh, I know this story, I just didnt remember the names.

> When a miscreant is annihilated, what does that mean? That that particular body of the person who opposes the Lord is incapacitated?

In Lord Nrsimhas case, theyre killed.

> There is a famous letter where Srila Prabhupada spoke on how there is a place for philosophical speculation in Krishna consciousness (Bombay 21 January, 1972).
I think there are several verses in the BG that support this too. For example: BG 9.34: "Engage your mind always in thinking of Me;" BG 11.55: "he who makes Me the supreme goal of his life /.../ he certainly comes to Me".

Yes

> Yes, this is the conclusion I have reached too. Now the only question is to identify which scripture that purports to be sabda, indeed is sabda.

Theyre shown by guru and sadhu who preserve and carry sabda in their hearts one generation after another.

> I cant imagine what that evidence is like? Is it about what those devotees were doing just before leaving the body, what the left body looked like ...?

Yes. Their experiences, behavior, peaceful expression on their faces after leaving. All this proves their life was successful.

> Some theists, but also atheists, argue that unless one has attained the goal of a religious practice, one might as well be completely wrong - "Unless one has reached pure Krishna consciousness, one is to be considered a plain run-of-the-mill person, completely ignorant of the Absolute truth." What would you say to that?

This doesnt apply to KC path. Theres a gradual realization on every level.

> Actually, the theists and the advocates of meat eating, casual sex etc. have something in common: 1. they both claim that I am not acting in line with my true nature, 2. they both claim that if I tried harder and kept to their instructions more consistently, then Id be happy; 3. they both claim that the misery I have felt on each path is irrelevant and that I should pursue the path anyway, until I reach happiness.

The error is at the beginning: Our true nature isnt miserable since we strive for happiness.
You said you have a good feeling from chanting and your panic attacks didnt appear for a long time.
These are tangible results.

> No, I meant that I am allowing for the possibility that the values I now hold may actually be completely wrong. This brings with it a host of problems. It is sometimes said that it is possible to be so open-minded that ones brain falls out. I think this is happening to me.

I dont think so. Youve been openminded before, now you think you have to be more critical but you didnt apply this criticism retroactively to you previous paths. This is inconsistent and it seems to me you cant do much about it.

> But these people have it in them to talk down to me and to treat me like I cant count to three. They appear like they really know what they are talking about, like they have personal realization of everything they say.

How they behave speaks louder than words. The problem is that one needs to know the person much closer.

> As a run-of-the-mill person, I do not have the ability to directly distinguish who is advanced and who is not, all I can go by are some external signs, which, however, may or may not be definitive indicators of advancement.

BG gives the signs of a sadhu. Make a checklist and see how far those people fit.

> If those devotees are indeed self-realized, even though externally, they may display some disrespectful behaviors, and even though I dont feel inspired by those devotees, I should still associate with them, is this not so?

Unless you have a choice to associate with those who inspire you.

> My point is whether as aspirants/devotees, are we supposed to declare something as true, even if we havent realized it?

If that comes from gss, then yes. With proper reference.

SP said that little Sarasvati, Syamasundaras daughter, is a perfect preacher of KC since she used to tell everyone she met "Do you know who Krsna is? Krsna is the SPoG."

> In Buddhism, we were taught to never speak beyond our competence/realization, and I am still keeping to this. Even though it does give my thinking and speaking a sense of relativism (and I suspect this has earned me quite a bit of criticism).

Thats good but relativism isnt a part and parcel of this approach. One simply says: "This is beyond me. Ask later." Nothing relativistic about it.

Thank you for helping me think through this, prabhu![br]

[br][quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]In Lord Nrsimhas case, theyre killed.[/quote]

Their gross bodies, their subtle bodies?[br]

[br][quote]Theyre shown by guru and sadhu who preserve and carry sabda in their hearts one generation after another.[/quote]

Why does it have to be this way? After all, God might have composed a book, placed it into a desert or library, and whoever finds it, finds it, right?[br]

[br][quote]Yes. Their experiences, behavior, peaceful expression on their faces after leaving. All this proves their life was successful.[/quote]

I am from the country, and the tradition here is open caskets, or earlier, the body used to be placed on a special table in the deceased ones home. I have seen some dead people, I couldnt remember an exact number. Most people looked "really dead", but my Catholic grandmother was something special. There was a smile on her face. People at the funeral awkwardly noted that they havent seen a such a nice deceased in a long time. As I later learned from my mother, my grandmother had given up her Catholicism a few years before death, though.[br]

[br][quote]This doesnt apply to KC path. Theres a gradual realization on every level.[/quote]

I imagine this is aligned with the notion that there is no threat of eternal damnation if one doesnt complete the path in this lifetime.[br]

[br][quote]The error is at the beginning: Our true nature isnt miserable since we strive for happiness.[/quote]

Both paths agree with that, but they have different ideas as to what exactly "mans true nature" is. Both say that the medicine they offer may at first taste bitter to me, because I have been dis-aligned with my true nature for so long.[br]

[br] Bottomline: on a meta-level, they have the same approach. Perhaps my mistake has been all along that I have tried to evaluate different paths on the meta-level, instead of looking directly into the content. But if we agree that we have been disaligned with our true nature for a long time, and that this is why medicine tastes bitter to us and we are not eager to take it - then we cannot adequately judge the content anyway, and what have we got left but the meta-level?[br]

[br]If I agree that I do not know what my true nature is, then how can I possibly agree or disagree with someone who claims to know what my true nature is? I cannot. The most I can do is assess this persons claims on some meta-level. Do you know a way out of this quandary (apart from a mystical experience)?[br]

[br][quote]You said you have a good feeling from chanting and your panic attacks didnt appear for a long time.
These are tangible results.[/quote]

These results do seem kind of mild, and I have no certainty whether these results came from chanting and other aspects of spiritual practice, or from something else altogether. [br]

[br][quote]BG gives the signs of a sadhu. Make a checklist and see how far those people fit.[/quote]

I suppose there are many references to what a sadhu is like. Do you mean the one from BG 4.8 - "person who is one hundred percent engaged in Krsna consciousness is accepted as a sadhu, even though such a person may be neither learned nor well cultured"? Or the twenty-six qualities of a devotee?[br]

[br][quote]Unless you have a choice to associate with those who inspire you.[/quote]

So I am supposed to associate with devotees, even if I dont feel inspired by them, even if we dont get along at all?[br]

[br][quote]> My point is whether as aspirants/devotees, are we supposed to declare something as true, even if we havent realized it?

[br]If that comes from gss, then yes. With proper reference.[/quote]

This is very strange to me. On the grounds of what would one make such declarations? [br]

[br][quote]SP said that little Sarasvati, Syamasundaras daughter, is a perfect preacher of KC since she used to tell everyone she met "Do you know who Krsna is? Krsna is the SPoG."[/quote]

Yes, I have heard of this.[br]

[br][quote]> In Buddhism, we were taught to never speak beyond our competence/realization, and I am still keeping to this. Even though it does give my thinking and speaking a sense of relativism (and I suspect this has earned me quite a bit of criticism).

[br]Thats good but relativism isnt a part and parcel of this approach. One simply says: "This is beyond me. Ask later." Nothing relativistic about it.[/quote]

But then I would have to make sentences such as "It is beyond me whether Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead or not". Surely devotees arent going to be pleased to hear this, and I am not going to be in good standing with them.
And what do I think to myself, when I read scriptures, for example? "All this is beyond me"?

Youre welcome.

> Their gross bodies, their subtle bodies?

They lost their gross body. Subtle body remains with us as long as were in the material world.

> Why does it have to be this way? After all, God might have composed a book, placed it into a desert or library, and whoever finds it, finds it, right?

That wouldnt serve the purpose of spreading the knowledge thru parampara. The origin of that book would be unclear.

> There was a smile on her face. People at the funeral awkwardly noted that they havent seen a such a nice deceased in a long time.

Yes. Pious soul. 8)

> I imagine this is aligned with the notion that there is no threat of eternal damnation if one doesnt complete the path in this lifetime.

yes

> Both paths agree with that, but they have different ideas as to what exactly "mans true nature" is.

Since we strive for sat, cid, ananda, that refers to transcending matter.

> But if we agree that we have been disaligned with our true nature for a long time, and that this is why medicine tastes bitter to us and we are not eager to take it - then we cannot adequately judge the content anyway, and what have we got left but the meta-level?

Sure

> If I agree that I do not know what my true nature is, then how can I possibly agree or disagree with someone who claims to know what my true nature is? I cannot.

You should be able to understand that you dont like suffering related to matter.

> Do you know a way out of this quandary (apart from a mystical experience)?

Thru gss.

> These results do seem kind of mild, and I have no certainty whether these results came from chanting and other aspects of spiritual practice, or from something else altogether.

What something else did you do since the time you got those good feelings?

> I suppose there are many references to what a sadhu is like. Do you mean the one from BG 4.8 - "person who is one hundred percent engaged in Krsna consciousness is accepted as a sadhu, even though such a person may be neither learned nor well cultured"? Or the twenty-six qualities of a devotee?

Those and others.

"Seven Guidelines for Recognizing Genuine Teachers" - Ven. Hsuan Hua:
http://www.ayurveda-california.com/ayurvedic_teachers_California/ayurvedic_teacher_guide_ven_hua.htm

This master was endorsed by Bhaktiananda M.

> So I am supposed to associate with devotees, even if I dont feel inspired by them, even if we dont get along at all?

The only other option is to associate with nondevotees. No good. Try to work on improving the relationship with devotees so therere no mutual bad feelings.

> This is very strange to me. On the grounds of what would one make such declarations?

On the ground of simply passing the message from gss like a postman.

> But then I would have to make sentences such as "It is beyond me whether Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead or not". Surely devotees arent going to be pleased to hear this, and I am not going to be in good standing with them.

We discussed the God of Tanakh. Whore the other candidates for Bhagavan?

The main thing Krsna wants from us is loving service. Then He reciprocates and devotees appreciate it.

> And what do I think to myself, when I read scriptures, for example? "All this is beyond me"?

We should read with humble, open and inquisitive attitude, thanking Krsna and gss for the chance to read sastra. Our understanding comes gradually.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]That wouldnt serve the purpose of spreading the knowledge thru parampara. The origin of that book would be unclear.[/quote]

I imagine the necessity of the parampara also has to do with the notion that (knowledge of) God cannot be attained solely by ones own efforts?[br]

[br]Is this analogous to learning a foreign language? Namely, it is impossible to effectively learn a foreign language if we all we have is a text written in that language or a sound recording of it. Unless there is some kind of intelligent exhange between oneself and the speakers of the foreign language (which includes bilingual grammar books and dictionaries, written by people who spoke both languages), it will be impossible to learn it.
[br]Similarly, I imagine it is impossible to perfect a spiritual discipline unless one has live, intelligent, relevant exchanges with those who have perfected it or are in some close relation to those who have. Hence the necessity of a disciplic succession, incorporated into a live culture.[br]

[br]On the other hand, some Christians argue that all one really needs is the Bible, and that anyone can properly understand it on ones own (no need for commentaries or discussions).[br]

[br][quote]Yes. Pious soul. 8)[/quote]

Actually, the way she lived her life wasnt all that pious. She ate meat, regularly drank some alcohol, even had a period of several years of severe alcoholism, killed countless chicken and ordered many other animals to be killed, did some other horrible things.[br]
It bewilders me how come she passed away so peacefully.[br]

[br][quote]Since we strive for sat, cid, ananda, that refers to transcending matter.[/quote]

Some, and very loud ones at that, claim such striving is vanity ...[br]

[br][quote]You should be able to understand that you dont like suffering related to matter.
[br]...
[br]> Do you know a way out of this quandary (apart from a mystical experience)?

[br]Thru gss.[/quote]

Sure, but to me, there is a serious problem of justification at this point. On the grounds of what could I rightfully claim something to the effect of "I have chosen the path of Krishna consciousness, and I have the right not to give in to anyone opposing this choice"?[br]

[br]Perhaps this sounds absurd, but where I come from, it is not. Theoretically, freedom of religion is granted by the Constitution, but the people contend this very much. Official psychology/psychiatry basically considers religion/theism to be a kind of delusion, as something to be treated, a disorder, whereby Christianity is the least stigmatized one (recently, Islam seems to have been somewhat destigmatized too). But practicing any other theism could get one sent into a mental institution.[br]

[br][quote]What something else did you do since the time you got those good feelings?[/quote]

Nothing out of the usual.[br]
The panic attacks did go away temporarily in the past as well and I had periods of forgetting issues of eternal damnation - when my breath meditation was going well, or when I numbed myself out with distractions (watching television, eating chocolate and such). But sooner or later, they came back.[br]
What is strikingly different this time is that I have been thinking and talking about eternal damnation on an almost daily basis now. But I havent gotten pushed over the edge yet.[br]

[br][quote]Those and others.

[br]"Seven Guidelines for Recognizing Genuine Teachers" - Ven. Hsuan Hua:
http://www.ayurveda-california.com/ayurvedic_teachers_California/ayurvedic_teacher_guide_ven_hua.htm[/quote]

I see, thank you. Some of those criteria are easier to apply than others. I think it also requires quite a lot of confidence to trust ones assessments of another person. And a lot of skill to know how to think and how to behave in relation to people who are less than perfect. This is a big topic.[br]

[br][quote]On the ground of simply passing the message from gss like a postman.[/quote]

But why would one do that, if one does not have personal realization of those messages?[br]

[br][quote]We discussed the God of Tanakh. Whore the other candidates for Bhagavan?[/quote]

Allah, with his 99 most beautiful names / attributes.[br]

[br][quote]We should read with humble, open and inquisitive attitude, thanking Krsna and gss for the chance to read sastra. Our understanding comes gradually.[/quote]

But such gratitude seems to presuppose that we are already firmly convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that Srila Prabhupada is a pure devotee, that even in our present conditioned state we can benefit from reading scriptures, that we can already have some relevant understanding of what we read, and more.[br]
What if we dont have such conviction?

If you are unable to be convinced that krishna is the supreme personality of godhead bhaktine baker.....after all the questions then you are not being engaged in devotional service directly!The process of understanding Kruc0u803 su803 nu803 a is sevonmukha '97 by rendering or doing devotional service. Sevonmukhe hi jihvu257 dau. Realization of Vu257 sudeva is possible by rendering service, beginning with the tongue. The tongue has two functions '97 to vibrate and to taste. So if one repeatedly hears and vibrates the Hare Kru803 su803 nu803 a mantra and tastes prasu257 da, food offered to Kru803 su803 nu803 a, by this very simple method one will realize Vu257 sudeva, Kru803 su803 nu803 a. Kru803 su803 nu803 a will reveal Himself. It is not that by our endeavor alone we can understand Kru803 su803 nu803 a, but our endeavor in loving service will make us qualified, and then Kru803 su803 nu803 a will reveal Himself (svayam eva sphuraty adahu803 ).So since you are not taking prasadam regularly....or at least have failed to appreciate that you are meant to eat till you drop and this will benefit you immensely.....at least chant 16 rounds please and learn to subsist on temple maha prasadam if possible..

> I imagine the necessity of the parampara also has to do with the notion that (knowledge of) God cannot be attained solely by ones own efforts?

Yes. There must be our cooperation based on a free will. In everything we do our effort is not the only factor of success.

> Is this analogous to learning a foreign language?

Yes. A good analogy. Feedback is the necessary part of any working system.

> On the other hand, some Christians argue that all one really needs is the Bible, and that anyone can properly understand it on ones own (no need for commentaries or discussions).

This is only the Protestant position. Historically theyve created most churches since every Protestant is taught that his understanding is right (often the only right one) and is convinced others must receive it too in order to escape eternal damnation. This path is right since _I_ am in (stress is on the _I_.) If thats not a spiritual pride, then what is? The results of this attitude are well-known. Earlier Catholics also suffered from this but theyve learned their lesson and since 2nd Vatican Council changed their course with regard to other religions (Encyclic Nostra aetate). Still a lot of understanding ahead though.

> Actually, the way she lived her life wasnt all that pious. She ate meat, regularly drank some alcohol, even had a period of several years of severe alcoholism, killed countless chicken and ordered many other animals to be killed, did some other horrible things.
It bewilders me how come she passed away so peacefully.

I also knew few similar people. My understanding is that if they werent pursuing sinful life as defined their traditions and society and had some God consciousness, their death was peaceful. The meat and alcohol thing is not taken as very serious within meat eating (Abrahamic) traditions. Their purpose is to regulate these propensities for those who cant give them up completely (yet they present vegetarian diet as ideal). But for someone who knows better and still gives in, the karma would be harder. This principle is common to Abrahamic and Dharmic traditions.

> Some, and very loud ones at that, claim such striving is vanity ...

Yet they prefer them over their opposites - short life, ignorance and suffering. They cant put into practice what Krsna says in BG 2.26,28.

> Sure, but to me, there is a serious problem of justification at this point. On the grounds of what could I rightfully claim something to the effect of "I have chosen the path of Krishna consciousness, and I have the right not to give in to anyone opposing this choice"?

Krsna Himself tells Arjuna at the end of BG he can do what he wants.

Id ask the one opposing my choice of KC to present a better option based on those above mentioned criteria, following the example of Srila Prabhupada. No one presented him anything. Most people cant do it simply because they dont want to study KC deep enough to make their own educated comparisons. Therere even only a few among scholars.
Some may oppose KC but when asked what exactly is wrong with it, they just refer to some externalities, thus revealing their shallow and incompetent understanding.
Therere very few people who delved deep enough into two or more traditions, both on theoretical and practical level. E.g. Master Hsuan Hua taught both Theravada and Pure Land traditions.
I remember talking with one person on Beliefnet who said his Srilankan Buddhist master taught him Hinduism when he asked about some of its aspects. (He didnt specify what exactly though.)
Otoh, quite some Christian clerics accepted that theres no clash between KC and Christianity, showed their appreciation for KC and even became initiated Vaisnavas.

> But practicing any other theism could get one sent into a mental institution.

Sounds like a former Soviet bloc or current Communist countries. Didnt you say youre from Slovenia?
I dont believe there were such cases in the last 20 years or even before, since former Yugoslavia was more liberal in comparison with other Eastern bloc countries.

> What is strikingly different this time is that I have been thinking and talking about eternal damnation on an almost daily basis now. But I havent gotten pushed over the edge yet.

Sounds like a progress from the therapeutic pov.

Ive mentioned that eternal in Greek original of Bible doesnt mean forever.

BG 16.19 gives a version of eternal damnation. But its based on free will of those who oppose Krsna.
Its their choice and can be changed at any moment.

> I think it also requires quite a lot of confidence to trust ones assessments of another person. And a lot of skill to know how to think and how to behave in relation to people who are less than perfect. This is a big topic.

The quality of every evaluation process depends on these things. Therefore therere so many counsellors, experts, etc. everywhere who help others with their knowledge. It all boils down to trust. Without trust life becomes impossible. One cant eat food, drink water (can be easily poisoned, did happen before), stay in a flat or a house (may collapse at any moment), drive a car (many accidents happen every day), deal with people (how do we know theyre not covert assassins to get us?), etc. These are called phobias and may ultimately lead to mental asylum.

>> On the ground of simply passing the message from gss like a postman.

> But why would one do that, if one does not have personal realization of those messages?

Can the postman withhold the message? Why would he do it if it was his own choice to do this job?

The spiritual path differs from the postman analogy a bit though. Practitioner by delivering the message intact grows in its realization. Hes compared to the iron in contact with fire.
If he withholds it, hell lose it. If he changes it, he wont be allowed to do it. And if he becomes opposed to Krsna and gss, he may become empowered to spread apasiddhanta and get his reactions.
One example of Lords rough dealing with heretics and seditionaries is in Tanakh, Numbers 16.

> Allah, with his 99 most beautiful names / attributes.

My understanding is that Allah is Paramatma since Quran says that Allah resides in the heart and knows our thoughts. In the dream article theres one quote from Koran 6.60 ("And He is it who takes your souls at night (in sleep),...") which attracts attention of one who knows about susupti, deep sleep, from Upanisads. I dont think such a detail could be made up by someone. Neither its probable Muhammad knew about Upanisads. And even if he knew, hed be endorsing them.
Some translations replace sleep by death. This can refer only to susupti, not svapna, and its remarkably fitting since in susupti the body loses sense of feeling due to withdrawal of pranas.

See also: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/library/HiddenTreasure.zip

> But such gratitude seems to presuppose that we are already firmly convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, that Srila Prabhupada is a pure devotee, that even in our present conditioned state we can benefit from reading scriptures, that we can already have some relevant understanding of what we read, and more. What if we dont have such conviction?

This is a general attitude to sastras from all genuine traditions. Since we learn from them, theyre to be respected.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Yes. There must be our cooperation based on a free will. In everything we do our effort is not the only factor of success.[/quote]

So this would imply I dont have to feel bad or inadequate if I realize that I cant do it all by myself.[br]
(I am familiar with BG 18.14 etc.)[br]

[br][quote]Krsna Himself tells Arjuna at the end of BG he can do what he wants.

Id ask the one opposing my choice of KC to present a better option based on those above mentioned criteria, following the example of Srila Prabhupada. No one presented him anything. Most people cant do it simply because they dont want to study KC deep enough to make their own educated comparisons. Therere even only a few among scholars.
Some may oppose KC but when asked what exactly is wrong with it, they just refer to some externalities, thus revealing their shallow and incompetent understanding.[/quote]

I have made such experiences myself.[br]

[br]What really seems to floor me is the other persons emotional / non-verbal reaction. I dont know how or why, but I seem to be extremely susceptible to other peoples emotional states, especially their negative emotions. Perhaps this has to do with my having spent a lot of time with animals, and attuning my sensitivities to them. With animals, correctly reading their mood decides everything in interaction with them, and it seems I am good enough at this.[br]

[br]But applying such sensitivity (and action based on it) to humans is usually disastrous. Add to this my knowledge of theology and religion, and I can end up with some really bizarre notions - which arent necessarily wrong or false, just in the domain of "its not polite to talk about this openly". This frustrates me very much.[br]

[br]I dont know how to overcome this. It seems that I focus too much on other people and leave too much up to them; then, once they take over, I become defensive and try to dominate; after that, theres bad blood on both sides.[br]

[br][quote]Sounds like a former Soviet bloc or current Communist countries. Didnt you say youre from Slovenia?
I dont believe there were such cases in the last 20 years or even before, since former Yugoslavia was more liberal in comparison with other Eastern bloc countries.[/quote]

Sure. Still, there is this fear in the air, and at least some devotees tend to keep a low profile publicly. I heard one say once: "If I would be in India, I too would, like the brahmacari here, wear a sikha and a dhoti, go out on the street and sing the holy name all day long, at the top of my voice. But here, I cant do that, Id lose my job." In the local Hare Krishna blog, a brahmana wrote quite a severe criticism on how the devotees here are keeping a low profile for fear of negative consequences. [br]

[br]So I am not the only one experiencing this. I make up "palatable excuses for the public" to explain my dietary preferences etc.; I have created a whole "health freak" persona and a number of other ways to avoid potentially problematic topics; but many problems are still open. This can become really overhwelming.
It is said somewhere that one should not make compromises with karmis, and that doing so has negative consequences, and I am afraid that my (and other devotees) evasive behaviors fall into this category.[br]

[br][quote]Ive mentioned that eternal in Greek original of Bible doesnt mean forever.[/quote]

Yes, I remember. I even forwarded the essay at your site to another devotee who didnt know the details about this.[br]

[br][quote]BG 16.19 gives a version of eternal damnation. But its based on free will of those who oppose Krsna.
Its their choice and can be changed at any moment.[/quote]

This is challenging for me to understand. If these souls are continually born in demoniac circumstances, and continually develop demoniac tendencies, where is their free will in all this to choose something other than further demoniac tendencies? Can someone who is firmly in the grip of a demoniac mentality even consider surrendering to God to be a possible option? This doesnt seem possible to me.[br]

[br]The purport says: "Such demoniac species of men are held to be always full of lust, always violent and hateful and always unclean." They are _held_ to _always_ be full of lust etc. How come it says _held_? Are they not actually always full of lust etc., but because they usually are, they are not suitable to associate with, even if sometimes they may have brighter periods? Is there a notion that associacion is to be chosen by the species a person belongs to, not by the persons few observed behaviors (as people usually do)?[br]

[br]Although, as another, perhaps similar example - it seems common that drug addicts occasionally think about quitting, even though they are so far drawn into drug abuse that it seems impossible they will ever get out. I dont know about other hardcore criminals and whether they ever have compunctions.[br]

[br][quote] It all boils down to trust. Without trust life becomes impossible.[/quote]

I agree. I dont think I have phobias, but as I said above, I seem to be very susceptible to the non-verbal, and also to logical fallacies, and I dont know how to deal with this susceptibility. If someone shouted at me, in anger "2 + 2 = 5! Black is white! All dogs are horses!" I am quite sure I would become very confused and unease. I know I get so when I hear someone proudly say of themselves "I dont need God, I am my own person" or "This is such wonderful music". Commercials are a nightmare for me - "LOreal. Because you respect yourself."[br]

[br]The deadly combination seems to be negative emotion + statement presuming objectivity. This brings my mind to a halt. [br]
When my mind computer is fed a paradox, it explodes, just like in old sci-fi movies ...[br]

How could I deal with that?[br]

[br][quote]Can the postman withhold the message? Why would he do it if it was his own choice to do this job?[br]
The spiritual path differs from the postman analogy a bit though. Practitioner by delivering the message intact grows in its realization. Hes compared to the iron in contact with fire.[br]
If he withholds it, hell lose it. If he changes it, he wont be allowed to do it. And if he becomes opposed to Krsna and gss, he may become empowered to spread apasiddhanta and get his reactions.[/quote]

Sure. But one does not choose to be a spiritual postman, does one? Once one is given the message, its as if the message demands, on its own, that the recipient (even if he is an unwilling one) do something with it, that he become a postman. Is this where the notion of being an eternal servant of God comes in?[br]

[br]The only analogy I can think of is that of infectuous disease, but I dont mean to imply something negative with it. Once one gets an infectuous disease, one simply gets some responsibilities with it, whether one likes that or not, and ones life can never again be the way it used to be.[br]

[br][quote]One example of Lords rough dealing with heretics and seditionaries is in Tanakh, Numbers 16.[/quote]

Just the sort of story I like! 8)[br]

[br][quote]See also: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/library/HiddenTreasure.zip[/quote]

I have just skimmed this, but it seems nice! I only have a very limited experience of Islam, but from what I did see and hear, I appreciate the most their eloquence and their special earnestness. It seems to be a very different mood than that of Christians (at least as far as my experiences so far go).[br]

[br][quote]This is a general attitude to sastras from all genuine traditions. Since we learn from them, theyre to be respected.[/quote]

Hm. This makes sense, of course. But I tend to be skeptical about teachers, of any kind. I suppose it is also a cultural issue. Namely, where I come from, teachers usually seem to have some kind of contempt for their students, and their interactions often seem to be centred around power struggles (the actual teaching and learning is secondary). Ever since I can remember, I hated going to school. At home, I wasnt beaten, but in kindergatren and at school I was. In anger. Yet I was expected to trust and respect these people anyway, under the threat of bad grades and "not being able to do anything with my life" and generally being considered a bad person.

> So this would imply I dont have to feel bad or inadequate if I realize that I cant do it all by myself.

Yes. Krsna tells Arjuna to do his best but without attachment to results. A very deep idea.

> "its not polite to talk about this openly".

If someone doesnt want to talk openly, maybe he can talk in private or refer you to someone else.

> I dont know how to overcome this. It seems that I focus too much on other people and leave too much up to them; then, once they take over, I become defensive and try to dominate; after that, theres bad blood on both sides.

Seems to me that you have quite a low self-esteem and simple detachment from otherss emotions is difficult for you. Tried assertivity training? It can improve communication, esp. among peers.

I had an impression that devotees in Slovenia are well known and accepted by public. Even the former president, a sadhu among politicians, was favorable to devotees. So this fear isnt substantiated.

Why should one be defensive about being a veg? When Im asked, I say that I dont find any reason to not be veg. This makes the questioner thinking and stops any further challenge. If hes inquisitive, I tell that I was prompted by the idea of ahimsa when I read about Buddha. This gives the chance to explain more, as per time, place and circumstances, all the way to prasadam.

> Can someone who is firmly in the grip of a demoniac mentality even consider surrendering to God to be a possible option? This doesnt seem possible to me.
The purport says: "Such demoniac species of men are held to be always full of lust, always violent and hateful and always unclean." They are _held_ to _always_ be full of lust etc. How come it says _held_?

The free will is always there but its covered by a layer of tamo guna which holds them in its grip.
Yet contact with a devotee, sastra, prasadam, etc., in case of their positive reaction, creates ajnata sukriti and then leads to devotional service. (SB 1.2.9)
After all, Lord specifically says that thru His devotees He liberates beings in rajo and tamo guna. (SB 11.12.3-6) This is the direct answer to BG 16.19.

> Are they not actually always full of lust etc., but because they usually are, they are not suitable to associate with, even if sometimes they may have brighter periods?

One shouldnt associate with them on their level, only with a view to help them, as a doctor treats those who need it with proper precautions.

> Is there a notion that associacion is to be chosen by the species a person belongs to, not by the persons few observed behaviors (as people usually do)?

Humans usually prefer association with humans. Those who get bad experience with humans, tend to associate with animals. But thats unequal association. The Vedic idea is to associate with the most sattvic or suddha-sattvic persons available.

> Although, as another, perhaps similar example - it seems common that drug addicts occasionally think about quitting, even though they are so far drawn into drug abuse that it seems impossible they will ever get out. I dont know about other hardcore criminals and whether they ever have compunctions.

If they find enough strength to ask for help and endure it, its possible. Therere many cases.
King Asoka before becoming a Buddhist was a merciless warrior killing tons of people.
Even hardcore atheists completely changed after NDEs or mystic visions.
Many devotees came from really degraded background.
Family members of devotees undergo surprising changes.
Sankirtan devotees observe every day the mercy working on the most fallen. They seem to be its most qualified recipients.

> I agree. I dont think I have phobias, but as I said above, I seem to be very susceptible to the non-verbal, and also to logical fallacies, and I dont know how to deal with this susceptibility. If someone shouted at me, in anger "2 + 2 = 5! Black is white! All dogs are horses!" I am quite sure I would become very confused and unease.

With detachment one can smile, at least inwardly. The idea is to deflect negativity like a lotus leaf repels water.

> Commercials are a nightmare for me - "LOreal. Because you respect yourself."

Since I got rid of TV (inherited from my mom), I recommend everyone to do the same.

> The deadly combination seems to be negative emotion + statement presuming objectivity. This brings my mind to a halt.
When my mind computer is fed a paradox, it explodes, just like in old sci-fi movies ...
How could I deal with that?

By developing detachment thru studying how gunas and material emotions stemming from them work and learning to become their observer (saksi). Anthony de Mellos last book, The Way to Love, speaks about this. I guess youve heard about him.

> Sure. But one does not choose to be a spiritual postman, does one? Once one is given the message, its as if the message demands, on its own, that the recipient (even if he is an unwilling one) do something with it, that he become a postman. Is this where the notion of being an eternal servant of God comes in?

Yes. The Love hooks us up. 8) Krsna is known as the thief of hearts, Citta hari in Bengali.

> The only analogy I can think of is that of infectuous disease, but I dont mean to imply something negative with it. Once one gets an infectuous disease, one simply gets some responsibilities with it, whether one likes that or not, and ones life can never again be the way it used to be.

This analogy also came to my mind.

> Just the sort of story I like! 8)

Many people find such stories repulsive, become offensive against God or even atheistic.
The idea to understand is that this is not a display of material anger but vinasaya ca duskrtam.

> But I tend to be skeptical about teachers, of any kind.

Good old Communist schools... I remember only a few good school teachers so if teacher would refer only to school teachers, Id be sceptical too. Heres a good one:

Nikdy jsem nedovolil '9akole, aby st'e1la v cestuc0u283 m'e9mu vzdu283 l'e1n'ed. (Mark Twain)

Bad authority is one of the most harmful combinations. Therefore so much stress is put on qualifications of gurus and disciples. Vedic culture stands and falls with a guru. Its opponents know this well.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Seems to me that you have quite a low self-esteem and simple detachment from otherss emotions is difficult for you. Tried assertivity training? It can improve communication, esp. among peers.[/quote]

I am well familiar with assertiveness training, it has been suggested to me before. The topic is summed up in the famous Assertive rights of an individual (http://www.livestrong.com/article/14699-improving-assertive-behavior/).[br]

[br]But for me, the problem was always the justification of those rights, how to explain to myself how and why I have those rights. They may seem common-sense and good and everything - but where is the metaphysical basis for them?[br]

[br]In none of the psychology books and articles, popular spirituality respurces etc. that promote assertiveness that I have read or heard is there much said about the metaphysics behind those assertive rights, often, there is no reference to metaphysics at all. This is what troubles me. I think I can be assertive enough, I can behave and speak like those books say I should, but there is this nagging feeling inside of me - Why? With what justification? On what grounds? How does my behaving assertively or non-assertively relate to lifes big questions? If God exists, then how should my behavior acknowledge this, in each instance?[br]

[br]I am a bit familiar with de Mello, but havent read much, I cant stand that style and that sort of metaphysics. Positive affirmations, relaxing music, spiritual universalism and such - makes me anxious, angry. To me, such things are useless, because they either do not address lifes big questions, or do so sentimentally.[br]

[br][quote]I had an impression that devotees in Slovenia are well known and accepted by public. Even the former president, a sadhu among politicians, was favorable to devotees. So this fear isnt substantiated.[/quote]

The former president was a league of his own here ...[br]

[br]It is said that a devotee should be bold with his Krishna consciousness. But displaying this boldness requires actual firm conviction - and I suppose this is what some devotees lack. And because they dont seriously give it a try, they dont have much feedback on how other people would react. But being fearful and reluctant about ones KC probably wont elicit many positive reponses from others either.[br]

[br][quote]Why should one be defensive about being a veg?[/quote]

I imagine that the power you have in your personal presence plays a part in such exchanges. I may say the same words as you, but my presence and tone of voice would suggest a weak confidence and thus be an invitation to challenges.[br]

[br]Then there are also situations where being a vegetarian could be an issue of breaking officially accepted guidelines, like for example in medical issues. Doctors vary in this, but if one is in a hospital and refuses to eat regular hospital food on the grounds of being vegetarian, they send one a dietician to explain to one the necessity of meat-eating. If one still refuses, there could be problems with the insurance for not following doctors orders.[br]

[br][quote]The free will is always there but its covered by a layer of tamo guna which holds them in its grip.
Yet contact with a devotee, sastra, prasadam, etc., in case of their positive reaction, creates ajnata sukriti and then leads to devotional service. (SB 1.2.9)
After all, Lord specifically says that thru His devotees He liberates beings in rajo and tamo guna. (SB 11.12.3-6) This is the direct answer to BG 16.19.[/quote]

Here, I must keep in mind that we are talking about a process that can take many many lifetimes!

[br][quote]One shouldnt associate with them on their level, only with a view to help them, as a doctor treats those who need it with proper precautions.[/quote]

I imagine this is related to the notion of _serving_ others (which inherently shapes and limits the interactions in a meaningful way)?[br]

[br][quote]Humans usually prefer association with humans. Those who get bad experience with humans, tend to associate with animals. But thats unequal association. The Vedic idea is to associate with the most sattvic or suddha-sattvic persons available.[/quote]

By this reasoning, even a weak devotee is better than no devotee?[br]

[br][quote]If they find enough strength to ask for help and endure it, its possible. Therere many cases.[/quote]

But where, how do they get that strength? Is this a matter of their free will, or their karma, or ajnata sukriti?[br]

[br][quote]With detachment one can smile, at least inwardly. The idea is to deflect negativity like a lotus leaf repels water.[/quote]

Sure, but again: On the grounds of what? I imagine one would have to be firmly convinced that one is a child of God, with many duties and obligations that need to be attended to, and that one is worthy; or at least have some other source of self-worth.[br]
Just trying to master the technique of deflecting negativity, without understanding the philosophy behind such efforts, eventually turns out to be a hollow effort, at least for me it has so far.[br]

[br][quote]Since I got rid of TV (inherited from my mom), I recommend everyone to do the same.[/quote]

Yes, but avoidance is just one part of the solution.[br]

[br][quote]Yes. The Love hooks us up. 8) [/quote]

So this is where we have no free will - we cannot choose whether by nature, we will be servants of the Lord or not, we only have some choice whether we act in line with our nature or not.[br]

[br][quote]Krsna is known as the thief of hearts, Citta hari in Bengali.[/quote]

If "citta" means heart, what does "hari" mean here then?[br]

[br][quote]Many people find such stories repulsive, become offensive against God or even atheistic.
The idea to understand is that this is not a display of material anger but vinasaya ca duskrtam.[/quote]

In 2008, there was a terrible hailstorm here, it caused a lot of damage on buildings, crops, infrastructure. I was in the living room, standing close to the window, when the hail broke through the glass - and it is very strong double glass. I was genuinely fascinated. I thought "Dont mess with Krishna". This is a bit awkward to talk about. I am not a fan of destruction. Its just that this display of the power of the elements, it somehow made me feel good, it made me think, trust there is cosmic justice and that humans do not rule, despite all their proclamations that they do. I suppose this is also selfish of me - I often feel violated by people, especially when I am told to think for myself, to obey the rules of normalcy and such, all those things that I find impossible or repugnant - and then when this higher power strikes down on those who violate me and they are in distress, I feel good, I feel vindicated.[br]

[br][quote]Nikdy jsem nedovolil '9akole, aby st'e1la v cestuc0u283 m'e9mu vzdu283 l'e1n'ed. (Mark Twain)[/quote]

Nikoli nisem dovolil, da bi '9aola stala na poti moji izobrazbi.[br]

I wonder what he did so that school didnt interfere with his education?[br]

> But for me, the problem was always the justification of those rights, how to explain to myself how and why I have those rights. They may seem common-sense and good and everything - but where is the metaphysical basis for them?

I dont think they were drawn from metaphysics but from everyday experience with communication.
They deal mainly with free will, detachment, responsibility for ones actions. All these are grounded in Vedic philosophy.
The general idea is to avoid conflict, too often degrading our communication and life. This is the idea of aikido. Aikido is assertivity in practice, applied to both physical and mental conflict avoidance, since conflict would lead to himsa which no one sane likes.

> How does my behaving assertively or non-assertively relate to lifes big questions? If God exists, then how should my behavior acknowledge this, in each instance?

Assertivity is not directly related to big questions but clears the way to have more time and peace to devote to them.

> I am a bit familiar with de Mello, but havent read much, I cant stand that style and that sort of metaphysics. Positive affirmations, relaxing music, spiritual universalism and such - makes me anxious, angry. To me, such things are useless, because they either do not address lifes big questions, or do so sentimentally.

No, de Mello isnt sentimental at all. He is good at applying Indian philosophical ideas to solving everydays problems of Westerners, esp. those with Christian background.

> It is said that a devotee should be bold with his Krishna consciousness. But displaying this boldness requires actual firm conviction - and I suppose this is what some devotees lack. And because they dont seriously give it a try, they dont have much feedback on how other people would react. But being fearful and reluctant about ones KC probably wont elicit many positive reponses from others either.

Yes, sounds almost like a vicious circle. The association of advanced devotee/s is needed to get out of this.

> I imagine that the power you have in your personal presence plays a part in such exchanges. I may say the same words as you, but my presence and tone of voice would suggest a weak confidence and thus be an invitation to challenges.

Sure, since weak confidence elicits questions like Does the person know what hes doing?, Is it his free choice?, Isnt it just a short-term fashion?
From my experience, the ahimsa principle is obvious to most people.

> Then there are also situations where being a vegetarian could be an issue of breaking officially accepted guidelines, like for example in medical issues. Doctors vary in this, but if one is in a hospital and refuses to eat regular hospital food on the grounds of being vegetarian, they send one a dietician to explain to one the necessity of meat-eating. If one still refuses, there could be problems with the insurance for not following doctors orders.

These dieticians arent well-trained, at least acc to John Robbins (Diet for New America), so to defeat them in argument shouldnt be a problem. Therere pro-veg studies one can point to. (We have some links on out site.)
And one can always claim a religious reason for choosing veg. They wont dare to interfere being afraid of a suit.
It seem that in CZ one can get veg food in hospitals. I have an experience from my local hospital from the last year, when I visited one vegetarian with a friend (his acquaintance).

> I imagine this is related to the notion of _serving_ others (which inherently shapes and limits the interactions in a meaningful way)?

Yes. Its a meaningful interaction (to heal the other person) but limited due to time, place and circumstances.

> By this reasoning, even a weak devotee is better than no devotee?

Infinitely better. But the difference isnt always obvious from a casual look, like in the above case when the devotee is afraid of reactions from people around him.

> But where, how do they get that strength? Is this a matter of their free will, or their karma, or ajnata sukriti?

(re drug users without previous contact with any spirituality) Mostly their reasoning based on experience, otherss arguments, emotions and pressure, etc.
There can be also an influence of prayers and other spiritual things at play.

> Sure, but again: On the grounds of what? I imagine one would have to be firmly convinced that one is a child of God, with many duties and obligations that need to be attended to, and that one is worthy; or at least have some other source of self-worth.

Simple experience with suffering is enough. Unless one is a masochist, that is.

> Just trying to master the technique of deflecting negativity, without understanding the philosophy behind such efforts, eventually turns out to be a hollow effort, at least for me it has so far.

I dont know what did you do but in general just learning a technique doesnt require to be a philosopher, just like learning to use computer doesnt require to be a programmer. But it depends how one uses that technique - for maya or for Krsna?

> Yes, but avoidance is just one part of the solution.

In the case of TV the only part one can do something about, together with developing distaste for gramya katha in general.

> So this is where we have no free will - we cannot choose whether by nature, we will be servants of the Lord or not, we only have some choice whether we act in line with our nature or not.

Yes. We cant stop loving (due to our nature) but we can choose how to express our love (in various rasas). Thats our experience with material love as well, although imperfect.

> If "citta" means heart, what does "hari" mean here then?

thief (CC 2.17.214), sometimes also stealing.

> Its just that this display of the power of the elements, it somehow made me feel good, it made me think, trust there is cosmic justice and that humans do not rule, despite all their proclamations that they do.

Yes, thats an important lesson.

> I suppose this is also selfish of me - I often feel violated by people, especially when I am told to think for myself, to obey the rules of normalcy and such, all those things that I find impossible or repugnant - and then when this higher power strikes down on those who violate me and they are in distress, I feel good, I feel vindicated.

The solution is not allow oneself to be violated... back to the conflict avoidance.

One shouldnt wish bad even to ones enemies, real or perceived. Its not easy but it can be achieved by realization karmas working.

> Nikoli nisem dovolil, da bi '9aola stala na poti moji izobrazbi.
I wonder what he did so that school didnt interfere with his education?

Right. I dont know but most probably he didnt pay attention too much and learned a lot by himself, like many talented kids do.
Karel Capek, famous Czech writer, said that education is what remains after we forget what we were taught at school. 8) Herere few others, Twain included (slightly different version):

http://cs.wikiquote.org/wiki/%C5%A0kola

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]The general idea is to avoid conflict, too often degrading our communication and life. This is the idea of aikido. Aikido is assertivity in practice, applied to both physical and mental conflict avoidance, since conflict would lead to himsa which no one sane likes.[/quote]

Sure. It has been my experience though that many people simply wish to dominate, in a peaceful manner - "Just do as I say and all will be fine. The way to avoid conflict is to do as I say."[br]

[br][quote]No, de Mello isnt sentimental at all. He is good at applying Indian philosophical ideas to solving everydays problems of Westerners, esp. those with Christian background.[/quote]

It just seems to me that in oder to take his understanding and advice, one would already need to be firmly convinced about Gods existence, ones own position and so on. Without that basic firm conviction - which, it seems to me, one has to get from some other source - his (and many others) advice comes across as sentimental.[br]

[br][quote]From my experience, the ahimsa principle is obvious to most people.[/quote]

"Bleeding heart compassion for animals" is what a Christian accused me of once ...[br]

[br][quote]These dieticians arent well-trained, at least acc to John Robbins (Diet for New America), so to defeat them in argument shouldnt be a problem.[/quote]

Good for you, but I have never met a doctor of any kind who would be willing to accept an argument from a patient. And even though medical insurance covers getting a second opinion, it has been my experience that doctors do not actually practice that. Changing ones GP/specialists also makes one suspicious. And as for religion based law-suits - pfft! If one is a visible member of a religios community, then they may have respect for ones wishes. Otherwise, one is a non-descript peace of living meat that has to conform to the norms of what some doctor thinks is "normal".[br]

[br][quote](re drug users without previous contact with any spirituality) Mostly their reasoning based on experience, otherss arguments, emotions and pressure, etc.
There can be also an influence of prayers and other spiritual things at play.[/quote]

So their strength is probably a mixture of factors, and not entirely under their control.[br]

[br][quote]Simple experience with suffering is enough. Unless one is a masochist, that is.[/quote]

It doesnt seem that simple to me. The experience of suffering is just that - suffering. Blunt, overwhelming, meaningless-seeming. One doesnt like it, and one seeks a way out, but this is not yet a guarantee that one knows or will find a way out. Many solutions that are being offered to reduce suffering just do not seem satisfactory. I know many psychologists and others are just trying to help, but to me, their advice always seemed like a recipe for more suffering.[br]

[br][quote]I dont know what did you do but in general just learning a technique doesnt require to be a philosopher, just like learning to use computer doesnt require to be a programmer. [b]But it depends how one uses that technique - for maya or for Krsna?[/b][/quote]

This is precisely the core of the issue for me.[br]
[br]I dont feel I have confidence in the difference between them.[br]

[br]And why try to master a techinque if one isnt sure of the reason for mastering it?[br]

[br][quote]thief (CC 2.17.214), sometimes also stealing.[/quote]

So I am calling out to a thief, at least several hundred times a day? Oh, the irony ...[br]

[br][quote]One shouldnt wish bad even to ones enemies, real or perceived. Its not easy but it can be achieved by realization karmas working.[/quote]

I cant say I am beyond schadenfreude. But when someone who patronizes me or displays great worldly self-esteem and demands my obedience, when such a person is struck with aging, illness and death, in their various forms, my thoughts tend to be "So there you go! You arent in control after all, even though you claimed you are your own person and in control of your life! And if you cannot even control your own life, then why should I let you control mine? I dont have to." It is only when someone is struck with aging, illness and death (which can take some time) that I feel some justification not to let that person rule me. I suppose this is a very roundabout way of figuring out whom to surrender to.[br]

[br][quote]Right. I dont know but most probably he didnt pay attention too much and learned a lot by himself, like many talented kids do.[/quote]

Or he had a lot of good karma from previous lives to live on![br]

[br][quote]Karel Capek, famous Czech writer, said that education is what remains after we forget what we were taught at school. 8) [/quote]

Unfortunately, that goes both in the positive way, as well as the negative.

> It has been my experience though that many people simply wish to dominate, in a peaceful manner - "Just do as I say and all will be fine. The way to avoid conflict is to do as I say."

Ipse dixit is not a good argument. It wont be fine if it opposes gss. Totalitarian regimes are a good example.

> It just seems to me that in oder to take his understanding and advice, one would already need to be firmly convinced about Gods existence, ones own position and so on. Without that basic firm conviction - which, it seems to me, one has to get from some other source - his (and many others) advice comes across as sentimental.

He actually doesnt speak much about God but about how to put spiritual laws and ideas into practice in the form of time tested techniques.

> "Bleeding heart compassion for animals" is what a Christian accused me of once ...

Very good. And "Compassion for the eternal soul is self-realization." (BGAII 2.1 p.)

> Good for you, but I have never met a doctor of any kind who would be willing to accept an argument from a patient.

Well, he cant do what the patient doesnt want.

> If one is a visible member of a religios community, then they may have respect for ones wishes. Otherwise, one is a non-descript peace of living meat that has to conform to the norms of what some doctor thinks is "normal".

No need to be a defeatist. They are our (patientss) servants and have to respect our will. But these things happen and this is one of the reasons many people dont have confidence in Western medicine. It may be good at mechanics like fixing bones etc. but fails miserably when the problem is more subtle. Often it makes the situation worse, what to speak of when the commercial factor gets involved. Ive witnessed the incompetence of these doctors and try to avoid them. All the people I know who have some health education background concur.

> So their strength is a mixture of factors.

Its individual.

> It doesnt seem that simple to me. The experience of suffering is just that - suffering. Blunt, overwhelming, meaningless-seeming. One doesnt like it, and one seeks a way out, but this is not yet a guarantee that one knows or will find a way out. Many solutions that are being offered to reduce suffering just do not seem satisfactory. I know many psychologists and others are just trying to help, but to me, their advice always seemed like a recipe for more suffering.

One should collect references and experiences from others. If something helps more people, then its likely useful. There cant be 100% guarantee in the realm of material solutions though.

> I dont feel I have confidence in the difference between them.

We start with confidence in the reality of suffering and search for the way out. Various paths provide tools how to decrease the suffering and we learn something from each. This goes on life after life. Experience of KC is the instant bliss and we realize its like nothing we knew in all our past. Its a life-turning point. This is the idea of Mertons maxim. Then we perceive the difference between our previous material experience and current spiritual experience at every step and doubts dissipate. But if our exposition to KC is tiny, the result will be tiny as well, like trying to cook on a small fire.

> And why try to master a techinque if one isnt sure of the reason for mastering it?

Our reasons stem from our paradigm. If devotees dont know what to do, gss help them to find out. For nondevotees the mind and other nondevotees become the guru and sadhu so the result is temporary, rajasic and tamasic.

> So I am calling out to a thief, at least several hundred times a day? Oh, the irony ...

Yes, transcendent Thief of hearts. He steals hearts of all inhabitants of Vrindavan.

> It is only when someone is struck with aging, illness and death (which can take some time) that I feel some justification not to let that person rule me.

Everyone with a material body is never a master and will be defeated by death. Its harder for those who lived in ignorance, as if no death will ever come. Yet a devotee tries to help every baddha jiva.
I knew one Georgian devotee who offered prasadam to Stalin to help him from hell.
One of the Desert Fathers (?) said he daily prays for souls in hell.
Youve probably heard of the Bodhisattva vow.

> I suppose this is a very roundabout way of figuring out whom to surrender to.

Yes, to Sri Sri Radha Krsna, the Ultimate Source.

> Unfortunately, that goes both in the positive way, as well as the negative.

We speak about materialistic school. Its main problem is the paradigm based on forgetfullness of our spiritual essence.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]
> By this reasoning, even a weak devotee is better than no devotee?

[br]Infinitely better.[/quote]

What about a devotee who dislikes or even contempts one? Or a devotee who simply doesnt want to have anything to do with me?[br]
Why, on the grounds of what should I pursue associacion with them (in the case that no other devotees are available)?[br]

[br][quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Seems to me that you have quite a low self-esteem and simple detachment from otherss emotions is difficult for you. Tried assertivity training? It can improve communication, esp. among peers.[/quote]

Who are my peers? If I am supposed to treat everyone as my master, as my prabhu, then I have no peers, and Id surely make a very bad servant if I detached myself from my masters emotions.

> What about a devotee who dislikes or even contempts one? Or a devotee who simply doesnt want to have anything to do with me?

You should analyze why he dislikes or contempts you. What part of the situation is yours and what his? Then to try to improve communication. Consulting with a mediator may also help.

> Why, on the grounds of what should I pursue associacion with them (in the case that no other devotees are available)?

What other options you have? To live in a seclusion, to associate with nondevotees or to create your own association by preaching. Any other?

> Who are my peers? If I am supposed to treat everyone as my master, as my prabhu, then I have no peers, and Id surely make a very bad servant if I detached myself from my masters emotions.

I said "esp." It helps to straighten up the communication even in dealing with superiors. If theyre intelligent, they should see their mistakes and change. If theyre not, at least you got some experience. But if your attitude is favorable and you pray for the improvement of the situation, Krsna may help. Everything is controlled by Him. When you realize it, you become peaceful.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]You should analyze why he dislikes or contempts you. What part of the situation is yours and what his? Then to try to improve communication. Consulting with a mediator may also help.[/quote]

I dont know why they dislike me, and talking about it seems impossible.[br]
What I resent so much about the whole situation is that I need to get their approval in order to make spiritual progress. No approval, no recommendation, no initiation, no spiritual progress.[br]

[br][quote]What other options you have? To live in a seclusion, to associate with nondevotees or to create your own association by preaching. Any other?[/quote]

I already live quite secluded from others.[br]

[br][quote]I said "esp." It helps to straighten up the communication even in dealing with superiors.[/quote]

But who are my peers? I seem to have no peers among devotees.[br]

[br][quote]If theyre intelligent, they should see their mistakes and change. If theyre not, at least you got some experience. But if your attitude is favorable and you pray for the improvement of the situation, Krsna may help. Everything is controlled by Him. When you realize it, you become peaceful.[/quote]

I am not sure the situation requires any improvement. I dont know what is right and what is wrong in all this.

> What I resent so much about the whole situation is that I need to get their approval in order to make spiritual progress. No approval, no recommendation, no initiation, no spiritual progress.

Who are they? Namahatta leader? Who else?

Your peers are other new namahatta devotees.

> I am not sure the situation requires any improvement. I dont know what is right and what is wrong in all this.

Imho, it does. To remain secluded is not a solution. But as I said earlier, without knowing the whole picture all I can do is to give some general suggestions. Im actually surprised that we talk about Slovenia. Ive met there some very nice devotees like Ananta P. RNS, temple president from Ljubljana. Does he know about this situation? Try to get the attention of your local mediator.

But on the grounds of what would I be entitled to any kind of mediation? I am not a member of ISKCON, I am not even convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
No, I dont think I have any rights to claim in all this. The problem is all mine.

You said you feel mistreated, describing various examples of local devotees dealing with you which seemed like overreaction to me (at least from your pov). If you want to serve Krsna in the association of local devotees to realize who Krsna is then you need to be at good terms with them. To me thats sufficient reason to smooth the terms out with the help of mediator or anyone able to help.
Is there any Slovene namahatta discussion forum? Did you try it out?

[sorry, Ill be offline till tomorrow afternoon]

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite] If you want to serve Krsna in the association of local devotees to realize who Krsna is then you need to be at good terms with them.[/quote]

I dont know if this is what I want, though. It seems to me that my desires play no part in all this. It is often emphasized that one ought to associate with devotees, engage in congregational chanting and aspire for initation. So I just thought this is what I should do.[br]

[br][quote]Is there any Slovene namahatta discussion forum? Did you try it out?[/quote]

Yes, there is an independent ISKCON forum, but there hasnt been any posting there for the past six months, and not much otherwise either.

Youll have to figure what you want, exercising your free will. One ought to do these things to understand Krsna and associate with Him in Goloka. If one wants to stay away from Krsna in the samsara, one doesnt have to do them. If one wants to worship another aspect of Krsna, as theyre revealed in other traditions, their ways should be followed.

Id recommend to contact the local NH leadership.

I really dont know how free will plays into all this. The only thing that does seem to be a matter of my free will is the choice of religion (as in Gaudiya Vaishnavism vs. Calvinism, for example); but that after that, the path has to be accepted as a whole. Once a decision for a path is made, there doesnt seem to be any free will anymore, only a consideration of what seems doable now and what doesnt, but no question of "I am willing to do this, now or someday, but I am not willing to do that, ever".

So its not "I want to chant, but I dont want to keep the regulative principles", for example. For me, chanting 16 rounds or not doesnt seem to be a matter of free will. I have decided to take up the GV path, and with this decision, numerous others have been made as well. If it is said that one should aspire to chant at least 16 good rounds daily, then this is what I should aspire to, and so on.

In fact, I did bring up this issue early on with the leader, but he didnt seem to relate to my quandary. He said it was simply up to me to decide. Whereas to me, it didnt look like my decision, as I have been presuming that ISKCON has laws or guidelines as to what a person has to do and believe at a minimum to be eligible for the associacion of devotees or at least what the minimum is for making visits to the nama-hatta meaningful.

Because as I have seen from experience, simply deciding to follow this path, establishing some kind of regular solitary practice, is apparently not enough to make interactions with the devotees meaningful and satisfactory. It seems there is quite a bit of "private work" that needs to be done first, and that there are some lacks (especially in the area of faith and confidence) that the devotees do not tolerate and will exclude the person who does conform to their standards of what makes for minimum acceptable faith/confidence.

I would appreciate it if someone would at least tell me straightforwardly "Dont come here again unless you are fully convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead" or "Dont come here again unless you regularly chant 16 rounds", for example. But nobody has, they just criticize me, patronize me or ignore me, and its up to me to figure out what I did wrong or what I lack.

"Having faith" does not seem to be an act of free will, though.

What is the Sanskrit word/phrase for "free will" ? Are there references to it is Gita or SB ?

The closest I have been refered to is this verse http://vedabase.net/bg/18/63/en

Svacchanda is the freewill in Sanskrit. It is only used towards Vishnu tattva. No jiva can claim to have full svacchanda-sakti or be svacchanda-gatih. However if a devotee desires, God can take a form to satisfy a particular desire of a devotee, out of His free will.

>I would appreciate it if someone would at least tell me straightforwardly "Dont come here again unless you are fully convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead" or "Dont come here again unless you regularly chant 16 rounds", for example. But nobody has, they just criticize me, patronize me or ignore me, and its up to me to figure out what I did wrong or what I lack.

This is very strange. In my experience, before I became a devotee, when I use to visit temple, devotees were very kind towards me. They will give me mahaprasadam and will spend hours answering my questions. I feel that they became less merciful once I became a devotee. When I was a beginner and lacking faith, they were more kind and loving. They encouraged me to spend weekends in the temple. They would even give me a place to stay in the temple so that I could attend mangala arati with them and chant with them in the morning. Whenever I will have holidays they will give me a place to stay and take me to harinama and different places with them. I can not remember even one incident when someone criticized me for being a noephyte though I used to have many strange ideas and I will often argue with them.In general my observation is that devotees are more kind and compassionate towards the beginners.

I guess ISKCON differs from place to place.

Baker, seems like we discussed this before. We have free will to choose a path and then also to choose various preferred activities (nine basic ones within bhaktiyoga). Free will is also the basis of a decision to stop following bhaktiyoga and return to the path of material karma, Krsna bahirmukha (turning away from Krsna).

--
Again, earlier in the very same paragraph from Sri Caitanya Sikshamritam (1.4) which the Leaves authors have cited (without including these sentences):
"All the jivas, [the Lords] separated parts, are prone to enjoying the fruits of karma. For as long as they are interested in serving Krishna by their own free choice, they continue to be free from the control of either maya or karma. But at the very moment when by their free will they deviate by wanting enjoyment for themselves or by forgetting their eternal function of serving Krishna, they immediately become bewildered by maya and subordinate to the control of karma."
The same sequence of change is described here:"For as long as (yata-dina) but at the very moment (kintu ye kshane)." In addition we are told the specific reason for this falldown-the jivas free exercise of their own choice. By"their own free choice" (svatantra iccha-krame) they can stay absorbed in Krishnas service as long as they want, and also"by their free will" (svatantra icchara) they can at any time choose to forget their eternal purpose and fall down into the world of karma. (Gopiparanadhana P. in: Our Original Position, ch. 18)
--

> For me, chanting 16 rounds or not doesnt seem to be a matter of free will.

That applies to initiated devotees. Others can chant less. Therere several NH stages with various numbers of rounds and principles followed (sraddhavan, etc.).

> I have been presuming that ISKCON has laws or guidelines as to what a person has to do and believe at a minimum to be eligible for the associacion of devotees or at least what the minimum is for making visits to the nama-hatta meaningful.

If your local leader doesnt know, ask at namahatta.org.

> I would appreciate it if someone would at least tell me straightforwardly "Dont come here again unless you are fully convinced that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead" or "Dont come here again unless you regularly chant 16 rounds", for example.

No, sadhu sanga is the means to become convinced about that, thru study, pariprasna and seva.

> But nobody has, they just criticize me, patronize me or ignore me, and its up to me to figure out what I did wrong or what I lack.

Makes no sense to me, unless we speak about kanisthas. Are they the same devotees who are afraid to go public that theyre devotees?

> "Having faith" does not seem to be an act of free will, though.

Yes, sraddha is not related to free will. We cant decide "Now Ill have sraddha".

dweller:
> I feel that they became less merciful once I became a devotee.

I wouldnt say less merciful, just giving less personal attention. The beginner is like a small child who is taken care of around the clock, but older child doesnt need so much attention since he can already do many things on his own.

from letter to Karandhar from Srila Prabhupada:

"Of course, if new men are coming, they may not be expected immediately to take to our regulative principles cent per cent. Therefore we should not be so anxious to induce them to live in the temple. Anyone who lives in the temple must agree to follow the rules and regulations without fail. So if some new man moves in with us he may become discouraged if he is forced in this way. Therefore let them live outside and become gradually convinced in the class why they should accept some austerity, then they will live with us out of their own accord and follow nicely everything. It is very difficult to give up very quickly so many bad habits as you have got in your country, so educate them gradually, first with chanting, and do not be so much anxious to count up so many numbers of new devotees, if such devotees go away later being too early forced. I want to see a few sincere devotees, not many false devotees or pretenders.

So my point is that the regulative principles must be followed by everyone. Otherwise their enthusiasm dwindles and they again think of sex and become restless, and so many problems are there. There is some symptom of missing the point. The point is to be engaged in doing something for Krishna, never mind what is that job, but being so engaged in doing something very much satisfying to the devotee that he remains always enthusiastic. He will automatically follow the regulative principles because they are part of his occupational duty'97by applying them practically as his occupational duty, he realizes the happy result of regulative principles. So the future of this Krishna Consciousness movement is very bright, so long the managers remain vigilant that 16 rounds are being chanted by everyone without fail, that they are all rising before four morning, attending mangal arati'97our leaders shall be careful not to kill the spirit of enthusiastic service, which is individual and spontaneous and voluntary. They should try always to generate some atmosphere of fresh challenge to the devotees, so that they will agree enthusiastically to rise and meet it. That is the art of management: to draw out spontaneous loving spirit of sacrificing some energy for Krishna. But where are so many expert managers? All of us should become expert managers and preachers. We should not be very much after comforts and become complacent or self-contented. There must be always some tapasya, strictly observing the regulative principles'97Krishna Consciousness movement must be always a challenge, a great achievement to be gained by voluntary desire to do it, and that will keep it healthy. So you big managers now try to train up more and more some competent preachers and managers like yourselves. Forget this centralizing and bureaucracy."

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Baker, seems like we discussed this before.[/quote]

We probably have, yes. It is a big topic for me that I need to see from many angles, so some things are bound to come up repeatedly. I apologize.[br]

[br][quote]We have free will to choose a path and then also to choose various preferred activities (nine basic ones within bhaktiyoga). Free will is also the basis of a decision to stop following bhaktiyoga and return to the path of material karma, Krsna bahirmukha (turning away from Krsna).[/quote]

But to know we are actually doing something in free will requires that our consciousness be quite pure, doesnt it?[br]

[br]Also, I have always thought that if a decision is made under durress, this isnt a decision made in free will anymore. And people generally turn to God under some kind of durress or other (unless they have been raised in God consciousness), which would suggest they are not doing it in free will - "When all else fails, people turn to God".[br]

[br]But even though I now feel I am under durress and feel like I have taken to turning to God to overcome this durress (which would put me in the group of people in BG 7.16), and my decision feels like it was done out of durress and thus not in free will - this isnt exactly the case, is it?[br]
[br]If I am understanding this correctly, then durress pertains to karma/material nature/identifying with the body, and the turning to God pertains to ajnata sukriti. Mere durress doesnt automatically make people turn to God, the four kinds of people in BG 7.15 surely experience durress too, but they do not turn to God (at least not as long as they belong to those four categories).[br]

[br][quote]"All the jivas, [the Lords] separated parts, are prone to enjoying the fruits of karma. ...(Gopiparanadhana P. in: Our Original Position, ch. 18)
--[/quote]

So this is a bit like it sometimes happens with a common human servant or butler who lives in the house of his master, does as he is told, but because he is intelligent and prone to enjoy, some fine day as he is on the way to the masters room with a delicious meal he has prepared for him, he thinks "What if I just nibbled on this here a bit and drank a bit of that?" In an instant, he forgets he is a servant, crouches down in the hallway and eats the meal he has prepared. After that, he has to go to the kitchen and prepare the meal again, come up with excuses why he is late and so on and entangles himself into a web of deceit, forging bills, clandestine enjoyment and so on.[br]

[br]I tend to forget that living beings are intelligent and prone to enjoy, as opposed to being robots ...[br]

[br][quote]If your local leader doesnt know, ask at namahatta.org.[/quote]

I will, thank you. I have applied for an account, but they say it takes a while to get it registered.[br]

[br][quote]No, sadhu sanga is the means to become convinced about that, thru study, pariprasna and seva.[/quote]

As far as I can tell, all I have got to show for my visits are to-do lists. Each time I went there, I wrote down what I need to do as my homework - "Look up verse that says ... Memorize the texts to the following songs ... Make exact list of forbidden foods ... Study such and such ... Decide about ..." It doesnt seem to me like any of those tasks could be done there.[br]

[br][quote]Makes no sense to me, unless we speak about kanisthas. Are they the same devotees who are afraid to go public that theyre devotees?[/quote]

Yes, some of them.[br]
I suppose at least some of them simply refuse to associate with me for fear they would become contaminated by me. I can understand that.[br]

[br][quote]Yes, sraddha is not related to free will. We cant decide "Now Ill have sraddha".[/quote]

I had one peculiar incident during chanting once, though: I was chanting, it was summer. There was a fly in my room, walking on the floor before my meditation mat. My first thought was "I need to get up and take it out". Then it occured to me that it is said all living beings benefit from hearing the maha-mantra and that if I were to take the fly out, I would in effect act on the notion that this fly cannot benefit from my chanting; which made me rethink how serious I am about my chanting and whether I myself believe any good can come from chanting, I recalled several offences, esp. about "giving some mundane interpretation", "thinking that chanting is overrated" and "lacking faith". So I thought, "allright, I will show some good will, continue chanting and let the fly be in here, and only take it out after I have finished my rounds". So I did. The fly sat still most of the time. Then, it made itself on the way directly toward the back of a closet. A little later, I saw it dangling from a spiders net. Peculiar, isnt it?[br]

[br]When I decided to chant anyway, despite the fly being there, what was actually happening? Did I have faith by will?[br]

[br][quote]I wouldnt say less merciful, just giving less personal attention. The beginner is like a small child who is taken care of around the clock, but older child doesnt need so much attention since he can already do many things on his own.[/quote]

Yes ... And I am a child with developmental disabilities. I am much slower than others. Among devotees at the nama-hatta, I feel like a preschooler among college students. I simply cant keep up with them, and I feel out of place, like a deadweight.

What kind of developmental disabilities do you have? What sort of country do you live in, I never seen anyone with developmental disabilities talking about free will, so please inspire me, bakerji.

> Yes, sraddha is not related to free will. We cant decide "Now Ill have sraddha".

Yes we can, in fact it is essential that you decide. For anything you desire, material or spiritual, there is a process/description of how to get it. E.g. If I want to become a qualified engineer, I must do certain activities like studying knowledge from a bona-fide source, applying the knowledge and developing realisation of the subject, taking guidance from already qualified engineers etc etc. Similarly if I want to develop sraddha, then I must do certain activities like studying knowledge from a bona-fide source, applying the knowledge and developing realisation of the subject, taking guidance from qualified people etc etc.

> We probably have, yes. It is a big topic for me that I need to see from many angles, so some things are bound to come up repeatedly. I apologize.

Then lets see what others have to say.

> But to know we are actually doing something in free will requires that our consciousness be quite pure, doesnt it?

The amount of free will is proportionate to our triguna mix, suddha sattva being our 100%. But to turn to or away from Krsna is possible always, at least by accepting help from others if one cant do much on his own as mentioned before.

> Also, I have always thought that if a decision is made under durress, this isnt a decision made in free will anymore. And people generally turn to God under some kind of durress or other (unless they have been raised in God consciousness), which would suggest they are not doing it in free will - "When all else fails, people turn to God".

If one has more intelligence, one starts to search God earlier. Then ajnata sukriti allows him to take up bhaktiyoga.

> But even though I now feel I am under durress and feel like I have taken to turning to God to overcome this durress (which would put me in the group of people in BG 7.16), and my decision feels like it was done out of durress and thus not in free will - this isnt exactly the case, is it?

You answer yourself below.

> As far as I can tell, all I have got to show for my visits are to-do lists. It doesnt seem to me like any of those tasks could be done there.

If theres no time during the meeting, then stay after and approach the leader with your issues.

> I suppose at least some of them simply refuse to associate with me for fear they would become contaminated by me. I can understand that.

I see. Madhyama devotee risks for the sake of others. Para upakara.

> My first thought was "I need to get up and take it out". Then it occured to me that it is said all living beings benefit from hearing the maha-mantra

> When I decided to chant anyway, despite the fly being there, what was actually happening? Did I have faith by will?

The first thought is the common reaction learned from material life. The second is based on spiritual knowledge. Your free will was to act on any of them and you chose the sraddha in the gss. This is a good illustration of a paradigm shift. Devotee gradually adopts fully the spiritual one, although he can still think from the pov of the material one.

> Yes ... And I am a child with developmental disabilities. I am much slower than others. Among devotees at the nama-hatta, I feel like a preschooler among college students. I simply cant keep up with them, and I feel out of place, like a deadweight.

Everyone starts from a different position. For those who continue in bhaktiyoga from previous life their start in this life is easier.
As I mentioned, youd need a closer attention from someone more advanced.

We have freedom of choice. That is our minute independence. In the human form that freedom is manifest in that every moment of every day we have the choice to either say this or say that; think this or think that; eat this or eat that; write this or write that; believe in this or believe in that; like this; hate that ....... and as man proposes, God disposes. Karma is a combination of what we desire and what we deserve. Without free will there would be no meaning to faith in God or love of God --- or even fear of God.

deena: You speak about the firm sraddha, I about the initial one.

> deena: You speak about the firm sraddha, I about the initial one.

Are you saying that initial faith is forced upon us?

No, it comes from ajnata sukriti.

From Teachings of Lord Caitanya:

"If, due to some righteous activities which provoke devotional service, one is influenced by the service attitude and takes shelter of the good association of pure devotees, he develops attachment for hearing and chanting. By developing chanting and hearing, one can advance further and further in regulative devotional service to the Supreme Lord. As one so advances, his misgivings about devotional service and his attraction for the material world proportionately diminish. By advancing in hearing and chanting, a devotee becomes more firmly fixed in his faith, and gradually his initial faith develops into a taste for devotional service, and that taste gradually develops into attachment. When attachment becomes pure, it exhibits the two characteristics of bhava and rati. When rati increases, it is called love of Godhead, and love of Godhead is the ultimate goal of human life."

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]> deena: You speak about the firm sraddha, I about the initial one.

[br]Are you saying that initial faith is forced upon us?[/quote]

[br][quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]No, it comes from ajnata sukriti.[/quote]

It appears the question here is:[br]
Is it possible to be completely covered by the modes, completely impervious to our true nature?[br]
BG 7.15 would suggest yes - but only temporarily (which may still be for a long time).[br]

[br]Another issue that seems to come up here is who gets the credit for a person taking to devotional service. SB 11.25.2-5 says that "advertising ones own prowess and justifying ones actions by ones strength are qualities of the mode of passion". Which would suggest that when we are concerned over who or what gets the credit for a persons taking (or not taking) to devotional service, it is the mode of passion that drives us. - Surely one thing is to explain how it comes to be that a person takes to devotional service, but when giving and receiving such explanations is accompanied by intense feelings and concerns over credit - then it seems it is passion at work.

> when we are concerned over who or what gets the credit for a persons taking (or not taking) to devotional service, it is the mode of passion that drives us. Surely one thing is to explain how it comes to be that a person takes to devotional service, but when
> giving and receiving such explanations is accompanied by intense feelings and concerns over credit - then it seems it is passion at work.

Yes, passion or just plain lunacy. As we are discussing, a person initially becomes faithful from their own ajnata sukrti developed over lifetimes and lifetimes, so only someone with a serious overestimation of their own abilities would try and claim credit for that. Ive always thought of it something like; if someone has won the lottery and I am the postman who delivers the official letter informing them of the good news, what kind of fool would I be if I tried to claim that I am the cause of their happiness? Sure the person might thank me for delivering the letter of good news, but really Im just the postman.

What is it about a person that they can develop ajnata sukriti? Is this due to some ability or quality inherent to the person?
Is ajnata sukriti a kind of force? I have found this -
"Bhakti-pravartaka sukrti, when accumulated, becomes a force and it generates devotion to Krsna" (http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/bhaktiyoga/bhaktiyoga-1.htm#1)

What would be a good analogy for ajnata sukriti?

Can it be compared to a field covered with snow, but when the sun shines, a spot here and there melts and the grass comes through? In this analogy, the snow are the modes, the field is the jiva, and the sunshine is the unintenional performing of pious actions or the associacion of the pure devotee. In the spots "where the snow has melted"- where the modes have been removed, "the grass on the field can show through" - the jiva can have clear vision. The smaller the spot of the melted snow, the smaller the scope of what the jiva can see clearly.

> What is it about a person that they can develop ajnata sukriti? Is this due to some ability or quality inherent to the person?

Ajnata means unknown, or without knowledge which to me implies that there is no particular inherent ability or quality in the person. As it says in the link you provided, it even happens "...by accident, or by arrangement of circumstance or because of social etiquette.."

Regarding analogies, Prabhupada uses two for ajnata-sukrti: one is depositing small amounts of money in the bank which eventually become a large amount. The other analogy is of a cloud, which only after collecting sufficient water releases rain.

Its the roll of the dice -- the luck of the draw. Its being in the right place at the right time. Its having connections in the heavenly planets. Its knowing a demigod who can trek to the shore of the causal ocean and put in a good word to Lord Vishnu on your behalf. Its cashing in your chips for whats behind the curtain instead of the brand new Sears Kenmore washer dryer combo. Its about carrying piety insurance and keeping up with your premiums. Its about good deeds and fertile seeds. Its a matter of the mode of goodness finally kicking the crap out of rajas and tamas and telling them to hit the road. Its taking the path less traveled. Its buying your ticket in advance.

If you believe all that Ive got a bridge for sale connecting Brooklyn with lower Manhattan.

If youre drowing in the middle of the ocean and somebody throws you a lifeline -- grab it. For the time being dont worry about where it came from or what its made of or how it got there. Get saved and then see what you can do to help the other drowning victims. Sending out an SOS ... Sending out an SOS