Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]I have to admit this is beyond my scope. I cannot imagine that in any religious tradition, at any point in time or space, there could be a much different mood than that of "If you dont like something, theres the door. If you leave, you will be damned, and this is all your problem."[/quote]
You obviously have not studied history of religion... ;) --- It gets much, much worse, just look at the history of Abrahamic religions... and it is still there... you have to keep things in perspective... :)

Sorry borokrishna das ...actually one of the punja family banned Tamala Krishna Goswami through his political connections in fiji, Prabhu,however it all turned out for the better he came here to South Auckland and literally helped destroy Narayanna maharajas preaching for the next ten years....by backing out of financing their temple project at the last moment!Sorry your sexual fantasies are not forfilled....borokrishnadas.Try chanting hare krishna....maybe jion the Catholic church as a preist,you might fit in there,but please give your blaspheme.....sorry i forgot thats how you get your kicks!

ramasiksa das, aka SGD -- why are you not telling us the whole story?

I am 99% sure that there is a GBC resolution restricting the establishment of guru murtis, with an exception placed on the Gaura-Govinda Maharaja murti in Bhubaneshwar.

Yes deena but because this is a maori project where strong authoritarian leadership is natural,we appreciate that the original iskcon flavour of guru disciple relationship is more inclined and suitable for our purposes!The temple or marae will have four trustees of several different gaudiya lines,this should allow the combined efforts to create a successful preaching platform .However it will be seperate from iskcon ...it already has the gbc Prabhuvishnu swamis initial encouragement and blessings.We have already sort the blessings of the senior devotees in our yatra which bwe have received.

What is wrong with just a picture Jaya Govinda Das? You look good on it as well.

Bhaktivinoda Thakur has some good quotes from Sri Tattra Sutram. He states:

"Spiritual ordinances are intended for the regulation of the ignorant human beings whereas those who are endowed with discretion and divine wisdom are not controlled by them'85since knowledge itself is the root of the scriptures the one who has attained that self-evident knowledge will not be ruled by the scriptures, but they guide him with advices. In case of ignorant people, this is not so. They must be governed by the rules of the scriptures for their upliftment'85

Devotees of the supreme Lord are not controlled by the scriptures since their activities are congenial to the divine wisdom'85Therefore, when the self realized devotees ordain any new arrangement, they should be agreed with as a religious code, even if such new arrangements are not found in the spiritual dictums of the previous sages." (191-204)

This was not new to me. All of us who have been with Srila Prabhupada have certainly experienced this to some degree or another, feeling he can look into your soul and know everything about your past and present and future, your motives, your most hidden desires. But this was an actual explanation of this that I had not heard before.Clearly, Srila Prabhupada did not appreciate the philosophy that Goursundar was speaking, a subtle impersonalism that placed the guru beneath the importance of Supersoul.

Certainly I agree that the '93guruwars'94 are ridiculous, since everyone is going to think his father is best. But to relegate the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada, to any lesser role, and talk about connection with Supersoul independent of him, this has a dangerous hint of impersonalism, and perhaps even anger or disillusionment with one'92s guru.

For this reason, Bhagavan Prabhu, with all due respect for you are certainly a great personality and served Srila Prabhupada in wonderful ways, I cannot agree with the later part of your article.

Srila Prabhupada made it very clear to me on that day that the Guru, Acharya, is to be kept first and foremost in one'92s heart. Yes, Supersoul is there, but who are we to be able to contact Supersoul? Yogis try for lifetimes for this connection, performing austerities and meditation and penance. For us, it is the mercy of Srila Prabhupada that is our salvation.

In gaudiya matha they never had any vyasa asanas except on vyasapuja...which was usually a public program
to hava a gaddhi...or a big seat for guru is actually a Mayavada ashrams practice.In none of the Vaishnava lines they have a physical guru sitting o a huge seat taking puja

Madhvas: the acarya who is on paryaya (two years shift for personaly taking care of the temple administration of Krishna in Udipi shared by eight mutts in turn) the very seat where Madhva sat, - whch is a simple wooden plank with a wooden plank for resting the back- is taken by the acarya after every arati when Madhva is believed to be to be in him to allow him to give philosophical judgements and caranamrta.Actually with iskcon.....
It was during a visit of a media guy when someone asked Prabhupada can we make a big seat for you which he promptly replied......why not ?

And then when he was asked how many steps for vyasasana....? 18 ok? he said I think so this is the beginning of vyasa asana

Otherwise any seat the preacher sits to give the discussion of vyasa is called vyasa asana, as the days pased by , western devotees figured out various ways of decorating the asana as big and wide as possible even though the old man .......thats what I used to call Srila Prabhupada when I was a new bhakta- sat in a small area of the seat at the tip of it

Srila Prabhupada was powerful enough he could adjust and do anything......he had the freedom,the sublime perfect movements of a sadhu .....simply satisfied ,content ,peaceful ,equi- poised...all 64 qualities of a perfect pure devotee.

SGD, can you give refs?

[quote][cite] bhagavan prasada:[/cite]It was during a visit of a media guy when someone asked Prabhupada can we make a big seat for you which he promptly replied......why not ?

And then when he was asked how many steps for vyasasana....? 18 ok? he said I think so this is the beginning of vyasa asana
[/quote]
And from there it did not take very long to establish a custom of daily gurupuja and of placing gurus murti on the altar - all without any solid shastric or traditional justification. Why should anybody be surprised that the new gurus wanted to sit on huge vasasanas?

I have no objection to such worship, provided all vaishnavas and all siksa gurus given the same worship in the temple.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]I have no objection to such worship, provided all vaishnavas and all siksa gurus given the same worship in the temple.[/quote]
What purpose does it serve? That we inflate peoples egos? That we draw attention to the external show? That we draw criticism from the outside? That we risk introducing personality cultism to our tradition? ------------ Today Western Vaishnavas fight and quarrel among themselves precisely because of the guru-centrism introduced into the sadhana and tradition. What happened to the old teaching that the guru is one? It disappeared in the new teaching that only my guru knows the truth and has the right solution.

Actually if you worship equally all vaisnavas, it hardly inflate anyones ego. But if you select a few and worship them it inflates the ego. It is not personality cultism, just paying obeisances to the vaisnavas. I know that it will never happen, but I have no objection, since it is truly that the sanga of the vaisnavas is the most worshipable object, that is the guru, that is the actual guru-centric program. But how can you worship the best vaisnavas if you have so many? Best to not have any special worship for the selected few diksagurus as if they are more worshipable than others. So we agree there.

We are so far from worshipping equally all vaishnavas it is not even funny... yes, I agree... it will never happen, not in our lifetime at least.

The change starts from you and your own example will lead the way. I will try to do it in my own life.

Sarasvati Thakur would say, "I dont read the book, I read the author. I first
see the author to see if hes authentic or not. I am a proof-reader. I always
see what is right and what is wrong. My father trained me in proof-reading,
but I am not only a proof-reader of the press I am a proof-readder of the
world. I proof-read men: I see their faults and try to correct them. I am a
proof-reader of religion also. I have appeared in karkata-lagna; so whenever
I see anything undevotional I will act like a karkata (a crab). If I see any so
-called devotion which is not actually in the true unalloyed spirit, I shall
pierce it!"

So this is the advanced mood of an archarya, Jaya ho...srimad bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura,

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]Actually if you worship equally all vaisnavas, it hardly inflate anyones ego.[/quote]

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]We are so far from worshipping equally all vaishnavas it is not even funny[/quote]

Scriptures say many times that not all devotees / Vaisnavas are equal, but that there are different classes of them, and different conduct is prescribed for dealing with each class (e.g. NoI 5).[br]
So why should all be worshipped equally? Or in what way should all be worshipped equally?

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]
What purpose does it serve? That we inflate peoples egos? That we draw attention to the external show? That we draw criticism from the outside? That we risk introducing personality cultism to our tradition? ------------ Today Western Vaishnavas fight and quarrel among themselves precisely because of the guru-centrism introduced into the sadhana and tradition. What happened to the old teaching that the guru is one? It disappeared in the new teaching that only my guru knows the truth and has the right solution.[/quote]

Where do you think this guru-centrism came from, how did it develop?[br]
Was it imported from India, along with particular Indian foods, Indian dress code, melodies from Indian films ...?

Baker: This refers to the difference between the approach of madhyama vs. uttama vaisnava.

Who is worshipable? Who can redirect all worship to Krsna without been affected? This is the worshipable position of Sri Vaisnava Thakur!

Is a coditioned soul as Kanistha Bhakta worshipable?

Another symptom of the kanistha-adhikari is that he is infatuated by the material qualifications of so-called great materialistic persons. Having a bodily concept of life himself, he is attracted by material opulence and thus minimizes the position of the Supreme Lord, Visnu. Such a kanistha-adhikari, therefore, is disturbed if a second-class devotee criticizes the nondevotees of the Lord. In the name of compassion or kindness, a kanistha-adhikari approves of the nondevotional activities of such materialistic men. Because the kanistha-adhikari is ignorant of the higher realms of devotional service and the unlimited transcendental bliss of Krsna consciousness, he sees devotional service merely as the religious aspect of life but thinks that life has many enjoyable and worthwhile nondevotional aspects. Therefore he becomes angry when second-class devotees, who are experiencing that Krsna is everything, criticize the nondevotees. Madhvacarya says that such a person, because of his rudimentary faith in Krsna, is considered a devotee, but he is bhaktadhama, a devotee on the lowest standard. SB 11.2.47 ppt.

Any Vaishnava who chanted a holy name sincerely is worshipable. Because you do not know who is advanced and who is not, better to worship all Vaishnavas, there is no sin in it and it is proper. The lower kind of devotees do not understand that all Vaishnavas are worshipable and they need to differenciate to keep up a rudimentary faith in their teacher.

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]
Where do you think this guru-centrism came from, how did it develop?[br]
Was it imported from India, along with particular Indian foods, Indian dress code, melodies from Indian films ...?[/quote]
Guru centrism and guru-personality cultism in Gaudiya Vaishnavism can be traced at least to the karta-bhaja apa-sampradaya. This was a very powerful movement at one time, until it became degraded when gurus started to take advantage of their followers. Srila Bhaktisiddhantas Gaudiya Matha was definitely very guru-centric. In Iskcon it naturally developed around Srila Prabhupada - he was of course not taking advantage of his followers but he did nothing to prevent it from becoming truly cultish. After his passing the officiating acharyas he nominated started their own personality cultism and most of them definitely took advantage of their followers, seriously degrading our movement. From the philosophy of guru is one they developed a philosophy of my guru is the only one. That is the danger of guru-centric approach.

maybe the gbc should also revise and update Sri Chaitanyas siksastakam verse to "..and ready to give all worship to others." in order to satisfy certain conditioned souls speculations!

same thing - see Bhagavata 10.16.35

Honour is Certainly not the same thing.Bhajan Shri Guru andGauranga!

Definition: The term bhajan is applied to the singing of hymns in Ancient India, and literally means "adoration."

Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy distinguish between adoration or latria (Latin adoratio, Greek latreia, [uc0u955 u945 u964 u961 u949 u953 u945 ]), which is due to God alone, and veneration or dulia (Latin veneratio, Greek douleia [u948 u959 u965 u955 u949 u953 u945 ]), which may be lawfully offered to the saints. The external acts of veneration resemble those of worship, but differ in their object and intent. Protestant Christians question whether such a distinction is always maintained in actual devotional practice, especially at the level of folk religion.

According to Mark Miravelle, the English word "worship" is equivocal, in that it has been used in Catholic writing, at any rate, to denote both adoration/latria and veneration/dulia, and in some cases even to as a synonym for veneration as distinct from adoration:

Adoration, which is known as latria in classical theology, is the worship and homage that is rightly offered to God alone. It is the acknowledgement of excellence and perfection of an uncreated, divine person. It is the worship of the Creator that God alone deserves. Veneration, known as dulia in classical theology, is the honor due to the excellence of a created person. This refers to the excellence exhibited by the created being who likewise deserves recognition and honor. We see a general example of veneration in events like the awarding of academic awards for excellence in school, or the awarding of the Olympic medals for excellence in sports. There is nothing contrary to the proper adoration of God when we offer the appropriate honor and recognition that created persons deserve based on achievement in excellence. Here a further clarification should be made regarding the use of the term "worship" in relation to the categories of adoration and veneration. Some schools of theology use the term "worship" to introduce both adoration and veneration. They would distinguish between "worship of adoration" and "worship of veneration." The word "worship" (in the same way the theological term "cult" is traditionally used) in these classical definitions was not at all synonymous with adoration, but could be used to introduce either adoration or veneration. Hence Catholic writers will sometimes use the term "worship" not to indicate adoration, but only the worship of veneration given to Mary and the saints.[3]

Orthodox Judaism and orthodox Sunni Islam hold that for all practical purposes veneration should be considered the same as prayer; Orthodox Judaism (arguably with the exception of some Chasidic practices), orthodox Sunni Islam, and most kinds of Protestantism forbid veneration of saints or angels, classifying these actions as akin to idolatry.

Similarly, Jehovahs Witnesses assert that many actions classified as patriotic by Protestant groups, such as saluting a flag, are equivalent to worship and are therefore considered idolatrous as well.

THE MOST IMPORTANT sastric understanding in this regard is that since Kanistha has no actual bhajan then he can neither give actual worship,bhaja. Neither is he qualified to receive such,of course.

All women belong to Krsna.All fame and adoration belong to Sri Guru. This is the word of the Lord. Praise be!
Jaya Sri Guru Nityananda Prabhu!

Individual souls are under the direction of Nityananda. They receive their service of Shri Gaurasundara, i.e., of Krishna, at His hands. Nityananda is not a jiva. He is Divinity. He is the ultimate source of the jiva. The jiva is a potency of Nityananda. No jiva can be the medium of the service of the Absolute to another jiva. The Absolute alone may communicate His service to the separable constituents of Himself. This is the real nature of the function of the guru.'94 Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur'a0

Are we talking about the same or is it something only you understand?

U have no understanding?

Question: Through a book can you contact the spiritual master?
Prabhupada: No, you have to associate.
Devotee: "Can you associate through a book?" she asked.
Prabhupada: Yes, through books and also personal. Because when you make a spiritual master you have got personal touch. Not that in air you make a spiritual master. You make a spiritual master concrete. So as soon as you make a spiritual master, you should be inquisitive. (RC London, Sept. 23, 1969)

I have no objection to such worship, provided all vaishnavas and all siksa gurus given the same worship in the temple. ..CCD.
Very interesting appreciation,however some guru are more pleasing to krishna.Then doz this mean in your vision that we artificially see them as on same platform.My piont is one day there will be an archarya or archaryas.....when iskcon becomes mature....Just like bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura put so much emphasis on sanyasis....brahmacari ...no women.He established a high standard...So when this comes again should we not worship those who are in fact more empowered.....at least for our own benefit?

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]Today Western Vaishnavas fight and quarrel among themselves precisely because of the guru-centrism introduced into the sadhana and tradition. What happened to the old teaching that the guru is one? It disappeared in the new teaching that only my guru knows the truth and has the right solution.[/quote]

And probably along with that - "And because I am the disciple of such a guru, who is the only one who knows the truth and has the right solution, I am also special and all others who are disciples of other gurus should bow to me (otherwise I and my guru will take offense and you will burn in the hell of Vaisnava aparadha)."

[br][br]

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]In Iskcon it naturally developed around Srila Prabhupada - he was of course not taking advantage of his followers but he did nothing to prevent it from becoming truly cultish. After his passing the officiating acharyas he nominated started their own personality cultism and most of them definitely took advantage of their followers, seriously degrading our movement. From the philosophy of guru is one they developed a philosophy of my guru is the only one. That is the danger of guru-centric approach.[/quote]

But how exactly is it degrading and endangering? Because the devotees fight and quarrel amongst themselves, cant come to a joint resolution how to act and then dont act, dont appear attractive to outsiders ...?[br]
On the grounds of what is this considered "degrading", though?[br]
[br]I am not asking this idly, I would just like to understand the reasoning behind all this. Because, on the other hand, there seem to be many devotees who feel perfectly justified in acting the way they do, even if it alienates others - "Those who dont agree with us are wrong and should leave".

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]
But how exactly is it degrading and endangering? Because the devotees fight and quarrel amongst themselves, cant come to a joint resolution how to act and then dont act, dont appear attractive to outsiders ...?[br]
On the grounds of what is this considered "degrading", though?[br][/quote]
By degraded I refer to going from a higher platform of objectivity and universality to that of subjectivity and sectarianism. And the danger of guru-centrism affects both the gurus (they are easily tempted to abuse their power and position) and the disciples (they are easily exploited and cheated). In-fighting and quarreling are just minor problems.

I have to admit this is beyond my scope. I cannot imagine that in any religious tradition, at any point in time or space, there could be a much different mood than that of "If you dont like something, theres the door. If you leave, you will be damned, and this is all your problem."

Baker, you are obviously wrong. Unitarian Universalistic church one such example. We have to say however that contemporary Unitarian Universalists do not necessarily subscribe to the historic beliefs of Unitarianism and Universalism, but it exists and includes a lot more now, but hey what are the fruits of it. Shrila Prabhupada had originally started his Universal Church on the similar basis, but monoguru-centrism as pavana says is the problem. The only fights you see here are about who is your guru and accept my guru as acharya.

The fight is about accepting those who are qualified as Sri Guru and those who are not as regular guru. It is about trying to establish the demarcation for the benefit of all.
We r trying to emphasise the demarcation while u people are trying to negate the demarcation to defend the status of ur regular gurus that u have bought into.
It is not about any particular Guru or Acharya on our part,just establising the rarity and some understanding,at least theoritical,of Sri Vaisnava Thakur.

Yes you say that Shrila Bhakti Raksaka Shridhara Maharaja is not Shri-vaishnava Thakur, but only your guru is Shri-vaishnava Thakur. Some say that Shrila Bhaktibedanta Narayana Maharaja is Thakur and you say that he is not on the same level as Shrila Prabhupada Bhaktivedanta. So you are sectarian are you not?

[quote][cite] borokrsnadasa:[/cite]Yes you say that Shrila Bhakti Raksaka Shridhara Maharaja is not Shri-vaishnava Thakur, but only your guru is Shri-vaishnava Thakur. Some say that Shrila Bhaktibedanta Narayana Maharaja is Thakur and you say that he is not on the same level as Shrila Prabhupada Bhaktivedanta. So you are sectarian are you not?[/quote]

I dont have Guru like that,not formally initiated. so how are we sectarian.

Actually,u should know the difference between discriminate and sectarian but u as yet cannot understand this truth as u r barely neophyte with heavy conditioning born of demoniac lower modes.
U have no actual discrimination. Not qualified.

Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Please accept my humble obieances.

anandahari prabhu,
please accept my humble obeisances. thank you for amazing siddhanta and quotes. may i know where else are you posting?

Yes[quote][cite] anandahari:[/cite][quote][cite] borokrsnadasa:[/cite]Yes you say that Shrila Bhakti Raksaka Shridhara Maharaja is not Shri-vaishnava Thakur, but only your guru is Shri-vaishnava Thakur. Some say that Shrila Bhaktibedanta Narayana Maharaja is Thakur and you say that he is not on the same level as Shrila Prabhupada Bhaktivedanta. So you are sectarian are you not?[/quote]

I dont have Guru like that,not formally initiated. so how are we sectarian.

Actually,u should know the difference between discriminate and sectarian but u as yet cannot understand this truth as u r barely neophyte with heavy conditioning born of demoniac lower modes.
U have no actual discrimination. Not qualified.[/quote] Thanks for confirmation.

Yes some gurus are special...loyal and through time become recognised...such character and realisations fail to be appreciated by the crowd sometimes.....Quote of Glories of Bhaktisiddanta saraswatitakura

"Im speaking, you are hearing, but there is a gap between us!"
[This statement gives us some hint of how a great Vaishnava preacher,
although moving amongst us, apparently as one of us, is always apart from
us.] Srila Bhaktisiddanta sarawati takura had many disciples at different levels of spiritual advancement, all committed to folowing him. Some were apparently advanced and intimate,
yet Srila Prabhupada himself knew of the great gap between himself and his followers. Even
his close associates could not catch up with him. Later, events showed that
almost all of his disciples had failed to grasp the essential purppose of his
mission.
Even those who had some realization of what he wanted (a strong,
united preaching movement) were later unable to implement it very
effectively (with the obvious exception of AC Bhaktivedanta swami Prabhupada ACBSP).
This profound statement also gives insight into the "lonely" position of a guru
and a sannyasi. Of course, mahabhagavata devotees are never lonely,
because they are fixed in their relationship with Krsna. But in this world
there may be few or no people for them to relate with on an equal, friendly
platform..

Yes some gurus are special...loyal and through time become recognised...such character and realisations fail to be appreciated by the crowd sometimes.....Quote of Glories of Bhaktisiddanta saraswatitakura

"Im speaking, you are hearing, but there is a gap between us!"
[This statement gives us some hint of how a great Vaishnava preacher,
although moving amongst us, apparently as one of us, is always apart from
us.] Srila Bhaktisiddanta sarawati takura had many disciples at different levels of spiritual advancement, all committed to folowing him. Some were apparently advanced and intimate,
yet Srila Prabhupada himself knew of the great gap between himself and his followers. Even
his close associates could not catch up with him. Later, events showed that
almost all of his disciples had failed to grasp the essential purppose of his
mission.
Even those who had some realization of what he wanted (a strong,
united preaching movement) were later unable to implement it very
effectively (with the obvious exception of AC Bhaktivedanta swami Prabhupada ACBSP).
This profound statement also gives insight into the "lonely" position of a guru
and a sannyasi. Of course, mahabhagavata devotees are never lonely,
because they are fixed in their relationship with Krsna. But in this world
there may be few or no people for them to relate with on an equal, friendly
platform..

Dear Devotees, Please accept my most humble obeisances. This Vaishnava assembly consists of some very highly qualified devotees, and certainly Bhagavan Prabhu and Bhakta das Prabhu are amongst them. Bhakta das'92 comments are very mature and insightful, and I also appreciate much of what Bhagavan has said in his short discussion. It is true you cannot wake a person who is pretending to be asleep, and the argumentative self-righteousness is self-defeating. However, the last paragraph, the short discussion on the guru, troubles me. It reminds me of discussions that I had so many years ago with my former husband Goursundar.

Since I am not really a part of any of the various '93camps'94 of today, either ritvik or non-ritvik, I really don'92t claim to know what Krishna has in mind for His movement, other than the absolute certainty that it will go on as predicted by Sri Chaitanya Dev. Just as we could not foresee everything 35 years back, so also we can'92t foresee everything now. How it will all unfold is beyond our ability to foresee. I think we should remain open to possibilities, and faithful to our guru.

What concerns me is the great similarity between this perspective on the guru with that of my former husband'92s view. With all due respect to Bhagavan Prabhu, who has done much to spread Lord Chaitanya'92s movement and who we all know was one of the '93chosen eleven'94, still I feel uncomfortable with this perspective on the guru.

My former husband Goursundar was also as charismatic and as brilliant as Bhagavan Prabhu. He wrote books, had a following, devotees adored him as a '93pure devotee'94 long before the days of Iskcon gurus. No doubt if he had stayed around, he would have been one of the '93chosen.'94 Of course, he did not actually take disciples, as Prabhupada was still very present, and he did not misuse his power in many of the ways that later gurus did. But the potential was there.

Fortunately for him, he left the movement some years before Srila Prabhupada left this world, and gave up his GBC and leadership roles. He didn'92t want it. It was burdensome to him, and he also foresaw much of what was going to happen. He was a brilliant scholar and a mystic as well. Srila Prabhupada often said '93he suffered from the disease of too much intelligence'94, the flaw that led to his falldown, '93thinking he knows more than his guru.'94

What I find troubling here is that the last few sentences of Bhagavan Prabhu'92s article sound very much like the philosophy espoused by Goursundar so many years ago. The focus is on the connection with Supersoul in the heart, rather than on the guru; truly this connection does exist, and it sounds really good. But please let me tell you my personal experience with this.

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite][quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]I have to admit this is beyond my scope. I cannot imagine that in any religious tradition, at any point in time or space, there could be a much different mood than that of "If you dont like something, theres the door. If you leave, you will be damned, and this is all your problem."[/quote]
You obviously have not studied history of religion... ;) --- It gets much, much worse, just look at the history of Abrahamic religions... and it is still there... you have to keep things in perspective... :)[/quote]

Its true, I havent formally studied the history of religion. I dare say I do know a bit about how bad it can get. Such as forced conversions, the Spanish Inquisition and its methods of establishing culpability (just the questions they have asked can make a person insane, to say nothing of the torture and the imprisonment), and so on.[br][br]
Like I said, it find it hard to imagine that the mood could be much different in any religious establishment, even if the actions are not. So I find it hard to appreciate that guru-centrism is bad. Not that I think it is good, I just imagine that this is as good as religion/spirituality gets. I have never seen or heard of anything that would be better, and I am probably not the only one. I cant imagine what the "higher platform of objectivity and universality" is, as opposed to that of "subjectivity and sectarianism".

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite] I cant imagine what the "higher platform of objectivity and universality" is, as opposed to that of "subjectivity and sectarianism".[/quote]
What you see between Iskcon and Narayana Maharajas sanga for example is a sectarian conflict caused by guru-centrism. Objective reality matters very little to the followers of a guru centric tradition. Even as theoretically there should be zero degree difference between these camps, followers of one guru would rather see Christians speak in their temples than disciples of the other guru. Isnt that almost insane?

Even my 10 year old grandson last summer -- when I took him to a Rathayatra festival -- on the way home he commented that Krishna consciousness seemed so different than other religions coming from India because with all the others its all about the person who started it like Swami this or Guru that or some Baba guy --- but with Krishna consciousness its all about Krishna. Its like Prabhupada wanted people to only know Krishna and not him. He didnt want it to be the Prabhupada religion (he kept using the word religion -- hes 10 years old) -- he just wanted to tell people about Krishna. So from the mouths of babes -- the innocent and direct perception of what is guru-centric and what is sectarianism and what is pure.

As for those who are constantly engaged in a "my gurus better than or just as good as your guru" -- they havent understood very much and have a lot of learning and growing up to do. The problem is that while they are supposed to be learning and growing up they are instead running their mouths via their keyboards all over the Internet. I cant even imagine how confused a person must be who decides they want to learn about Krishna consciousness and then "Googles" "Hare Krishna." Its a shame! Sad state of affairs all this fighting about gurus.

> followers of one guru would rather see Christians speak in their temples than disciples of the other guru. Isnt that almost insane?

Theres a logic. Christians wouldnt probably denigrate any guru since they have no idea about these internal issues.

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]What you see between Iskcon and Narayana Maharajas sanga for example is a sectarian conflict caused by guru-centrism. Objective reality matters very little to the followers of a guru centric tradition. Even as theoretically there should be zero degree difference between these camps, followers of one guru would rather see Christians speak in their temples than disciples of the other guru. Isnt that almost insane?[/quote]

You will have to explain this, please. Why should there be zero degree difference between these camps?[br][br]
Because to me, it seems there are only two sides: sectarianism (different traditions/factions fighting over who has the one and only right understanding),[br]
or New Age and the like ("anything goes").[br][br]
You seem to be suggesting that there are other possibilities. Perhaps they are not even on the continuum between the two mentioned above?

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]Why should there be zero degree difference between these camps?[br][br]
Because to me, it seems there are only two sides: sectarianism (different traditions/factions fighting over who has the one and only right understanding),[br]
or New Age and the like ("anything goes").[/quote]
Since both Srila Prabhbupada and Narayana Maharaja represent exactly the same parampara lineage, there should be zero degree difference between them - at least that is the theory of parampara. But that is not how their followers think and act. The amount of venom between them is considerable. Why? IMO that is strictly due to their extreme guru-centric nature and yes, each side claims to have the one and only right understanding.

Interesting discussion. Portnoy (Purusottama) made rather a powerful argument too.

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite] I cant even imagine how confused a person must be who decides they want to learn about Krishna consciousness and then "Googles" "Hare Krishna." Its a shame! Sad state of affairs all this fighting about gurus.[/quote]
Yes, I meet newcomers like that on the internet way too often. Even devotees who have been around for a very long time are confused - and they are the ones who do most of the damage. Certainly Krsna consciousness should be all about Krsna. Out of some 700 verses in Gita only 2 or at the most 3 are about guru. And there is no need to turn Srila Prabhupada into Jesus or Muhamad to maintain the purity of our line. His place is forever safe in the sampradaya.

[br][quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]Since both Srila Prabhbupada and Narayana Maharaja represent exactly the same parampara lineage, there should be zero degree difference between them - at least that is the theory of parampara.[/quote]

I presume the only difference then ideally should be in which geographical area each lineage covers?

[br][br]
[quote]But that is not how their followers think and act. The amount of venom between them is considerable. Why? IMO that is strictly due to their extreme guru-centric nature and yes, each side claims to have the one and only right understanding.[/quote]

I suppose many people in the West are so used to sectarianism and and fights over who has the one and only right understanding (the Christian churches are a role model for this here) that they take it for granted and dont expect anything else.
[br][br]
But where does this extreme guru-centric or church/institution-centric nature come from, why does it flourish? Is this because a spiritual organization can have characteristics like the false ego as well?

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]But where does this extreme guru-centric or church/institution-centric nature come from, why does it flourish? Is this because a spiritual organization can have characteristics like the false ego as well?[/quote]
Those are good questions... Im not sure there is just one answet to them... False ego is definitely a factor here.

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]As for those who are constantly engaged in a "my gurus better than or just as good as your guru" -- they havent understood very much and have a lot of learning and growing up to do. The problem is that while they are supposed to be learning and growing up they are instead running their mouths via their keyboards all over the Internet.[/quote]

Where can they go to see a non-sectarian / non-guru-centric spiritual society and learn from it?

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite][quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]But where does this extreme guru-centric or church/institution-centric nature come from, why does it flourish? Is this because a spiritual organization can have characteristics like the false ego as well?[/quote]
Those are good questions... Im not sure there is just one answet to them... False ego is definitely a factor here.[/quote] It usually arrives from not following the instructions, vani, but concentrating on the vapu or form. The vani of the guru is key, not his external form of vapu. On the level of vapu there are many many gurus. Vani is always the one and only (even with variations from instructor to instructor). We first tie vani to vapu and then consider them the same vapu-guru, and at the end anyone who doest have the same vapu or if vani does not match exactly or correspond to our understanding of our vapu-guru, we reject that instructor, because we think he has to represent our vapu-guru, where as he really should represent Krishna-vani. Unless you understand this you will not understand how guru is one and there always be some sectarian motive. (Just one possible answer).

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite][quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]As for those who are constantly engaged in a "my gurus better than or just as good as your guru" -- they havent understood very much and have a lot of learning and growing up to do. The problem is that while they are supposed to be learning and growing up they are instead running their mouths via their keyboards all over the Internet.[/quote]

Where can they go to see a non-sectarian / non-guru-centric spiritual society and learn from it?[/quote] In a way it is an ideal. I do not think. considering the amounts of neophytes there are always in reality of any religion, that you will just go out and find it. ISKCON if it followed the instructions and ideals, should have been a non-sectarian movement for all Vaisnavas. Now they propos WVA, but it is just a binder of a few gurus as I see it.

[quote][cite] maah!:[/cite]Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Please accept my humble obieances.

anandahari prabhu,
please accept my humble obeisances. thank you for amazing siddhanta and quotes. may i know where else are you posting?[/quote]

Maah prabhuji,
Please accept my humble obeisances.

Thank u for your encouragement. Also like to thank you for amazing siddhantic understanding and inspiration. may i know where else are you posting prabhu? I myself just post a few other things on facebook and sometimes on email list.
Ysvt.
Jaya Nitai!

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite][quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite] I cant even imagine how confused a person must be who decides they want to learn about Krishna consciousness and then "Googles" "Hare Krishna." Its a shame! Sad state of affairs all this fighting about gurus.[/quote]
Yes, I meet newcomers like that on the internet way too often....[/quote]
Actually if you google Hare Krishna you will go to Krishna. Hare Krishna is a very nice and safe word to google, transcendental. ;-)

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite][quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]But where does this extreme guru-centric or church/institution-centric nature come from, why does it flourish? Is this because a spiritual organization can have characteristics like the false ego as well?[/quote]
Those are good questions... Im not sure there is just one answet to them... False ego is definitely a factor here.[/quote]

yea,I would agree that is a most obvious answer. A die hard defence of someones egoic perception of My own personal Guru. Like fanatic or sentimental following of competitive football teams.

" fanaticism is mere overcompensated doubt" Carl Jung.

When guru becomes egoic property of neophyte disciple,to be defended at all costs!

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]It usually arrives from not following the instructions, vani, but concentrating on the vapu or form. The vani of the guru is key, not his external form of vapu. On the level of vapu there are many many gurus. Vani is always the one and only (even with variations from instructor to instructor). We first tie vani to vapu and then consider them the same vapu-guru, and at the end anyone who doest have the same vapu or if vani does not match exactly or correspond to our understanding of our vapu-guru, we reject that instructor, because we think he has to represent our vapu-guru, where as he really should represent Krishna-vani. Unless you understand this you will not understand how guru is one and there always be some sectarian motive. (Just one possible answer).[/quote]

This addresses something I have been wondering about all along. Namely, that focusing only on the instructions like that, disregarding who they come from, might seem like holding anumana as the highest pramana. So in an effort to keep to sabda as the highest pramana in ones mind, one focuses on one person and the instructions they give. To me, discounting who an instruction comes from is tantamount to letting some logical abstraction take the upper hand. Because to me, it seems to be a mere logical abstraction to focus on what is being said as opposed to who says it. - Although upon second thought, this may not apply to sabda, while it does apply to statements of conditioned beings.

June 1, 1972, Los Angeles
Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.3.15
"Simply sit down and hear about Krsna. Thats all. But that hearing must be from a person who is realized. Then it will act."

The Real Nature of the Function of Guru

"Individual souls are under the direction of Nityananda. They receive their service of Shri Gaurasundara, i.e., of Krishna, at His hands. Nityananda is not a jiva. He is Divinity. He is the ultimate source of the jiva. The jiva is a potency of Nityananda. No jiva can be the medium of the service of the Absolute to another jiva. The Absolute alone may communicate His service to the separable constituents of Himself. This is the real nature of the function of the guru.'94 Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur

Guru is one. This is in application to not just any guru but to Sri Guru. Sri Guru is not typical Joe the blopper guru.

Sri Guru is One. Sri Nityananda-Rama.

Harikesha,SDG,TKG,Kirtananda Maharaja or whoever are not One.

Sri Guru is one.

The Acaryas tell us to become intelligent enough to distinguish between these insufficient guides or lanterns and the super-sufficient bright shining sun that is Sri Guru.
(see NOI verse 5 and purport)

Some purely unmotivated genuine siksa from Maah prabhu,free from hypocrisy or pretense;

Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Please accept my humble obeisances.

There are negative effects on the guru for accepting an unqualified disciple and there are also negative effects on the disciple for taking an unqualified guru. Then, due to those malific effects, when the self-effulgent Acarya manifests again, neither are in a position to take advantage of Him and they lose out. Spend the dark night chanting and waiting for the rising sun, dont accept the glow-fly or lantern as Sun. Guru is to be accepted as good as God. That means we must pray and wait for the One who is as good as God--not accept any unqualified person and make mental adjustments that he is as good as God because we have chosen him. Not that, eventually seeing the low condition of the guru we have chosen, we degrade the position of guru to mean just a teacher. Persons who have done this even consider Srila Prabhupada an ordinary guru who became self-realized by the mercy of His Guru, on the level with other India-born gurus. These attitudes bring about Sri Guru Vaisnava Aparada which is highly counter-productive to our real good.

Even if we accept and later abandon such an unqualified guru, there will still be subtle negative effects. It is something like breaking the tie of marriage with divorce..still there are debts, children, family, possessions, identities (individually, jointly and socially), memories, and other results of karrma accrued jointly.'a0

By following Srila Prabhupadas instructions and reading His unchanged books we will become purified and attract His divine guidance in our lives. By praying and crying for His real representative, we will get the Sri Guru who can give us Sri Krishna. Sriman Mahaprabhus movement is for those who are begging for Sri Krishna, so if a guru is not in possession of Sri Krishna, we had better not get involved with him.

- written by Maah prabhu. 'a0'a0

The Real Nature of the Function of Guru

"Individual souls are under the direction of Nityananda. They receive their service of Shri Gaurasundara, i.e., of Krishna, at His hands. Nityananda is not a jiva. He is Divinity. He is the ultimate source of the jiva. The jiva is a potency of Nityananda. No jiva can be the medium of the service of the Absolute to another jiva. The Absolute alone may communicate His service to the separable constituents of Himself. This is the real nature of the function of the guru.'94 Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur'a0

Those who have accepted bhogus gurus are infected with apasiddhanta. "If a man once takes the bad association of counterfeit Vaisnavas or non-Vaisnavas, he will never follow any beneficial instructions. He will only learn hypocrisy." Babaji Maharaja, Two Beyond Duality

"As a result of an offense to the Holy Name or an offense in worshipping the Deity one will acheive three results: dharma (mundane piety), artha (material opulence), and kama (sense pleasure). These are actually misfortunes for the living entity. Our guru, Lord Nityananda, cheats pseudo-devotees by supplying their material wants but depriving them of love of God." Babaji Maharaja, Two Beyond Duality

[quote][cite] anandahari:[/cite]
" fanaticism is mere overcompensated doubt" Carl Jung.

When guru becomes egoic property of neophyte disciple,to be defended at all costs![/quote]
There is some truth in the Jung quote, but IMO that is not all what fanaticism is in real life. Fanaticism is usually induced by the leaders, for a wide range of reasons. -------- Defending your guru at all cost is often a byproduct of my guru is the only one doctrine, and a belief that your guru is always right. These are all problems mostly affecting neophyte disciples - neophyte not in the sense of time in the process, but more like immature and naive.

" your guru is always right " -- that how you detect it. On the other hand if a guru is wrong, and his followers can admit it, that is a sign of maturity. However it is mainly about followers not the gurus. It is followers who start calling to vaisnava aparadha clause.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]" your guru is always right " -- that how you detect it. On the other hand if a guru is wrong, and his followers can admit it, that is a sign of maturity. However it is mainly about followers not the gurus. It is followers who start calling to vaisnava aparadha clause.[/quote] The problem is when the doctrine of my guru is always right comes directly from the guru himself. ------------- Obviously, he can be considered being wrong on that case right from the start... ;) But seriously... little children need to think that their father is always right, but as they grow up their understanding matures into knowledge that their father always had good intentions, even when he was wrong on a particular issue.

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]" your guru is always right " -- that how you detect it. On the other hand if a guru is wrong, and his followers can admit it, that is a sign of maturity. However it is mainly about followers not the gurus. It is followers who start calling to vaisnava aparadha clause.[/quote] The problem is when the doctrine of my guru is always right comes directly from the guru himself. ------------- Obviously, he can be considered being wrong on that case right from the start... ;) But seriously... little children need to think that their father is always right, but as they grow up their understanding matures into knowledge that their father always had good intentions, even when he was wrong on a particular issue.[/quote]

yes,sometimes seemingly wrong maybe. Or as Srila Prabhupada said;"there may be some mistake externally,however internally there is never mistake."
Of course this really only applies to those who have that inner-life,awakened to the Self.
That divine sincerity of purpose.
Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

[quote][cite] Kula-pavana:[/cite]These are all problems mostly affecting neophyte disciples - neophyte not in the sense of time in the process, but more like immature and naive.[/quote]

From my own observations, I would say neophytes tend to be emotional, more or less unable to view spiritual practice from a scientific perspective. Say, for example, "You are a spiritual being having a human experience" and many people will take this very emotionally - they will view it as something very personal, very intimate - and as such something they feel vulnerable and awkward about. From a psychological perspective, it is then understandable that they do not wish to expose themselves or be exposed so intimately to many people - so they focus on one or a handful of persons.

Srila Bhaktisiddanta saraswati takura Prabhupada explained that seva (service) and mala (chanting) are non different.
"Service to guru is service to Krsna. Even if you do not 64 rounds, if you are
fully engaged, that is alright. But your lakhya should be one lakh. Your aim
should be to chant one lakh of names. In Bengali lakhya means "aim." A
lakhya should be to chant one lakh.
And your aim should be also service to Hari, guru and Vaishnavas. And sometimes if you are so busy and have no
time to chant on your mala atall in the day, then at night, instead of going to take rest, then you chant. In the daytime you should be busy in service. If you cannot finish your prescribed japa then sleep less and chant. Do not increase
your time for sleeping, increase your time for chanting." SRILA Prabhupada also said that serving Hari, guru and Vaishnavas is more important than chanting 64 rounds. "Unless you do service your so much chanting will be meaningless.
My personal experience....when my senior Prabhupada disciples,my siksa gurus became unhappy when we worshipped their godbrothers on vyasa- sana...,when they became envious,our response was we retreated from being their humble servants.However when other godbrothers whom were truly non-envious,accepted seeing them being worshipped....we accepted them also as gurus in a similar vein....they also became worshipable! This was an advanced preaching temple atmosphere which i have yet to experience again unfortunately!

> However when other godbrothers whom were truly non-envious,accepted seeing them being worshipped....we accepted them also as gurus in a similar vein....they also became worshipable!

In reality the end of Acarya era came in a revolt, every single member of NA Temple presidents meeting, who was Prabhupada disciple, became guru or GBC after they sorted out other gurus. Long live the king... style.

Still wandering who hired guys to attack KS and JPS, within a short time after? Both have scars and were hospitalized for a long time. Nobody knows who and why it happened and nobody is looking. Revolt is a revolt, treat of no-confidence is a treat of no-confidence. TPs at least at that time were a great power and it took some organizational skills to wind them down. This is the actual reason, for rather a few gurus running off about the same time. Bhagavan at least came in the open and said, that it was because a few godbrothers were becoming dissatisfied . But in reality there was just more of the same, just different people and different vyasasanas,

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] But in reality there was just more of the same, just different people and different vyasasanas,[/quote]
You may call it envy, but I think the constant stressing of the guru greatness is completely artificial. If a disciple actually sees the spiritual benefits he derives from his guru, the veneration flows naturally and is truly personal. IMO there is no need for daily guru-puja, guru worship on the altar, elaborate vyasasanas and other external show centered on the gurus. We should go back to the way of Hari-bhakti-vilasa and tradition. A lot of people are turned off by institutionalized guru worship in our movement. And given the guru scandals which plagued our movement, who can blame them? If we are going to make a show, lets make a show of humility, not a show of pride, pomp, and ostentation.

ccd wrote: Interesting discussion. Portnoy (Purusottama) made rather a powerful argument too.

Whence did this rumor that Im Purusottama begin? I knew a Purusottama way back when. His name was Paul Auerbach and he was an ISKCON devotee and left the movement in the early days. I ran into him on the streets of NYC a few years later and he told me that he went through a period thinking he might be Jesus Christ but then gave that idea up and was just trying to be a good Christian (ironically he was born in a Jewish family). As a matter of fact -- I think I might have heard or read somewhere recently that he passed away.

Anyway -- Im not that Purusottama nor any other person by that name --- and Im not Rappaport (Walter Matthau). Im not Phil Roth (author of Portnoys Complaint). Im certainly not sri_govinda_das, the New Zealander with multi-personality disorder.

As anybody with eyes can see by my photo -- Im Popeye the Sailor Man. Yes, Im Popeye the Sailor Man. Im strong to the finish cause I eat my sag paneer, Im Popeye the Sailor Man.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]>
Still wandering who hired guys to attack KS and JPS, within a short time after? Both have scars and were hospitalized for a long time. Nobody knows who and why it happened and nobody is looking. Revolt is a revolt, treat of no-confidence is a treat of no-confidence. [/quote]

I can say that the attack on JPS was perpetrated by a lunatic here in Spain. I was around and I remember telling the then temple president that he should throw out such a lunatic to what he did not pay any attention as usual. The guy came with 10 or 12 big knifes presented in a crazy way as a present for the deities in Janmasthami amen of other obvious crazy treats.

This is the photo of protnoy from his profile. It was there before the Poopeye the Sailor Man.... I do not know why you changed that one to the Poopeye the Sailor Man...

hey love the treads...portnoy prabhu,would make a superb rasta archarya!.....haribol!....always thought there was a certain blackness about cha! maan!

Theyre called dreds and thats not me. Its a picture of an old friend of mine. Neither is he a rasta man. Hes just a guy who lives a reclusive life out in the woods, grows his own food and hasnt cut his hair nor shaved in many a year. I put up that photo as a joke. I just would rather keep my identity incognito for the time being for personal reasons. Actually I think it was somebody by the name of Narot who came to the conclusion that I was Purusottama. Im not sure how he arrived at that but he was wrong. Anyway - what does it matter? If I can add something of value to these discussions then whats the difference? If I cant then still whats the difference who I am? With all the names others are using -- whether they are their real initiated names or some other name --- I have never personally met any of you in my ISKCON days which began in 1968 and ended the year after Srila Prabhupada departed (1978).

Prabhupada was the only Guru at that time, so it was more about focusing on Supersoul rather than on Prabhupada as a person directly. Not making a guru cult in other words. So because Goursundar was so brilliant, and such an excellent speaker, (and my former husband as well), I became very confused by what he was speaking. I was quite attached to Prabhupada, the person Prabhupada, like a father, a master, my guru, all of the above. So I felt frightened, for my simple love for Prabhupada as the personality he was, felt threatened. I believed my relationship with him was eternal and I did not wish to believe otherwise. Mine was a perspective of utmost simplicity, and since Goursundar was my husband of many years, though estranged at the time (he had recently left Prabhupada, left Iskcon and me as well), I was very susceptible to whatever he spoke. In a sense, he was like a guru to me.

So when Srila Prabhupada came to Hawaii soon after, I went to his quarters at the Honolulu temple and privately asked him about this exact same philosophy. I told him what Goursundar was saying, that we should connect with Supersoul, that the eternal guru was Supersoul, that making a guru with a personality cult was not as it should be, and so forth. It was a very good argument. But Prabhupada'92s response shocked me.

He slammed his hand down on his desk, hard, and said loudly, '93Who has told you to see Goursundar? I say, you stay away from Goursundar!'94

He was more than firm. He then pointed to his bookcase and said, '93Take out that book.'94 I did as I was told. '93Now read the prayers to the Spiritual Master.'94 I read. And he commented on each verse of the Sri Guru Charana prayers.

(You may now be wondering where is the recording of this. If there is one,as I gave all my tapes to archives many years ago, perhaps it will turn up soon as they are now being edited. For I too would like to hear it again. It would clear up so many of the present day misconceptions.)

The most significant thing that impressed me at the time was his absolute reassurance that my relationship with him was and is eternal, as a person, as the personality that he is. He left no doubt in my mind on that day.

The other most significant thing that impressed me is how he explained that the Guru is omniscient and omnipresent in that Krishna is in the heart of all beings, and the Guru is constantly with Krishna, and can therefore be in constant contact with his disciples wherever they are. In that way, he explained, the Guru can be present in the heart of the disciple, and can know what he is doing and thinking; thus he can be omniscient and omnipresent as God is in everyone'92s heart, and by his constant connection with Krishna, he can also be so.

It is only by the mercy of Krishna that we get Guru, and by the mercy of Guru that we get Krishna. We cannot know Krishna otherwise. And if due to our lack of adhikar, spiritual eligibility, Krishna directs us to some second class guru, that is our unfortunate fate. And if by the direction of Krishna as Supersoul we are directed to some great Acharya like Srila Prabhupada, that is our great good fortune.

Krishna in the heart is the one who dictates who will be our guru, '93you go here or go there.'94 Whoever is meant to be our guru, that is God'92s business, not ours. We should not try to interfere in God'92s business.

In my humble opinion, those of us who have the unexplainable good fortune of recognizing Srila Prabhupada as our Guru Maharaja should worship him with every breath, and every fiber of our being, throughout our life, no matter what circumstances we are in due to our past karmas. Srila Prabhupada was indeed like this with his Guru Maharaj. He worshipped his Guru Maharaja daily, whether he was in a rat-infested building in the Bowery or a palatial temple in India. He never swerved.

He always kept a picture of his Guru Maharaja nearby, and said he was with him at every moment. He used to say, '93I never feel separation from my Guru Maharaj'94, not that '93I never feel separation from Krishna.'94 When he would leave for some other place, I would inevitably cry, and he would always tell me, '93Don'92t think I am ever separated from you. I never feel I am separated from my Guru Maharaj. He is always with me.'94

It is this mood that is real to me, and this may be a much safer mood to cultivate for everyone who is a follower of Srila Prabhupada, whether they had the good fortune of meeting him or not.

This is not a personality cult. Srila Prabhupada is indeed the extraordinary Acharya of the Golden Age. He is the '93Mor Senapati Bhakta'94, the '93Military Field Commander'94 who was predicted by the Lord Himself to lead Lord Chaitanya'92s sankirtan army. Time will tell; everyone will come to know of his greatness. That also is predicted.

In Chaitanya Mangala, it is recorded that Narada Muni, while visiting the spiritual world, came upon Lord Gouranga. Shri Gouranga Dev told him of His mission to destroy the sinful activities of the Kali Age.

He said, '93With the powerful chopper of Nama-Samkirtan, I shall cut the hard knots of demoniac desires from the hearts of everyone. Even if the sinners reject religion or flee to foreign countries, still they will get My mercy. I will send '91mor senapati-bhakta'92 to go there and deliver them.'94 Mor means '93My'94, senapati means '93military field commander,'94 and bhakta means '93devotee.'94 So, '93Mor Senapati-Bhakta'94 refers to that great devotee who will lead Lord Chaiainya'92s sankirtan army, who is empowered by the Lord to spread Krishna consciousness all over the world. That Mor Senapati Bhakta is Srila Prabhupada, and even some may not yet recognize it, in time they will. This is the greatest benediction of our time.

Brahma Vaivarta Purana also describes a conversation that took place in Dvaraka between Lord Krishna and Srimati Ganga devi. Ganga devi came to express her fears at the advent of the Kali Age, and the imminent departure of the Lord back to HIs Eternal Abode. In anxiety, she spoke on behalf of all the sacred rivers, saying:

'93Oh Lord, we can see that Your pastimes are about to end, and people are becoming more and more materialistic. You have been very merciful to us. After You leave, however, all the sinful people of Kali Yuga will bathe in our waters, and we will become overwhelmed with sinful reactions.'94

Lord Krishna smilingly replied, '93 My dear Ganga Devi, please be patient. After five thousand years My mantra-upasaka (worshiper of the Holy Name) will appear in this world and spread the chanting of the Holy Names everywhere. Not only in Bharata-Varsha (India) but also all over the world people will chant Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna Hare Hare. Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama Hare Hare.'94

'93By this chanting, the whole world will become eka-varna, having one designation, namely, Hari-Bhaktas, devotees of Lord Hare. And because the devotees of Lord Hari are so pure, anyone who contacts them will become purified from sinful reactions. These pure devotees will visit Bharata-Varsha and purify you from sinful reactions by bathing in your sacred waters. This period of worldwide chanting of Hare Krishna will continue for ten thousand years.'94

This Mantra-Upasaka is Srila Prabhupada, the Lord'92s Senapati Bhakta. The ten thousand year period is just beginning, the Golden Age within Kali Yuga. Doesn'92t this put things into perspective?

Re the last part about BVT see: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/kaliyuga.htm

anandahari: your chained posts are considered spam, please refrain
if you like to post a large text you can always attach a text file in your post using the "attachments" feature