This is a response to a comment from raghavendu on the Breaking news: Hare Krishna guru too average looking post. He was responding to an article on Hare Krishna News where I commented on how writers at the Sampradaya Sun were acting like cult fanatics in their uproar over Hridayananda Swami not wearing “devotional clothes” 100% of the time. Raghavendu wrote:

Sure the slant of that article makes sense. But Hridayananda is in ISKCON and he is an ISKCON sannyasi-guru. So he’s obligated to act according to Prabhupada’s and ISKCON’s standards. If he wants to be a self-styled “devotee” then he should be honest and be clear about his differences with both his guru and the institution. But Hrdayananda will also defend ISKCON theology in disputes over interpretation with other Gaudiya Institutions who have Bengali and Indian acaryas. So on one hand he will say things and act in a way separate from ISKCON orthodoxy, yet at other times like in defense of the GBC position on the origin of the soul, he will wrap himself in flag of ISKCON loyalty. You can’t have it both ways and this is really why he has brought down so much trouble on himself.

You’re being presumptuous about the reason for Hridayananda’s support of fall-vada, for all you know he actually believes in it.

I disagree with the conception you put forth about his needing to be “obligated to act according to Prabhupada’s and ISKCON’s standards.” That sounds like something a ritvik-vada would say. Why is he obligated to act like what is considered to be de rigueur by ISKCON or Prabhupada?

Should he come out in support of crude racism along with advocating slavery for black people? Should he claim the moon landings were hoaxes? Should he teach that God advocates a harsh sexist homophobic patriarchal society as the perfect social construct? How about teaching that too much heterosexual sex is the cause of homosexuality? How about teaching that “there have been no women scientists, mathematicians, or philosophers in all of human history?” How about teaching “how can there be no life on the moon when moon rays give life to vegetation?” How about teaching that if the moon was just dust and rocks that they would get very hot in the direct sunlight and therefore moon rays wouldn’t be pleasing – so why are moon rays pleasing, rascal scientists? How about teaching that the Sun is closer to us than the moon? Prabhupada taught all of that. How about the classic antisemitism Prabhupada espoused, should Hridayananda be made to pass that along as representing Krishna’s truth or be kicked out of his position?

Look, the fact is that most people who became devotees from Prabhupada, besides becoming Vaishnavas, which was a good thing, were also turned into nutjobs to varying degrees because they took the teachings of a sometimes nutjob as God’s holy writ. Eventually many or most of them realize how crazy they were to think like they thought, but many many are still lunatics to one degree or another (read the Sampradaya Sun or Dandavats to see proof of that — if you don’t see the lunacy that’s because you’re crazy as well). Why should a person be forced to accept the dictates of crazy people?

Prabhupada and ISKCON and Prabhupada followers put forth a fanatic fundamentalist crazy totalitarian cult-like mentality as representative of Krishna. If someone rebels against their insanity in their group, good for them, fight the crazy power! I’m not saying that Hridayananda Swami deserves to be a guru and sannyasi in ISKCON, what I am saying is that the reason to disown him from that position should be something other than:

“He aint like us pa, what with his fancy lernin and city ways. Tarnation if ise goin to let a fancy pants know-it-all get away with thinking he’s better than us or knows better than the almighty god of gods and savior of the universe Jesus H. Prabhupada!”

http://harekrishnanews.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/breaking-news-hare-krishna-guru-too-average-looking/

In the comments to the previous post kalki das brought up the topic of archana, deity worship, and how it is taught by Prabhupada. He mentioned this verse from Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita: http://vedabase.net/cc/madhya/19/152/

Kalki pointed out how that verse is about the importance of sravanam kirtanam — hearing and chanting — as the process of “watering the seed of bhakti,” but how in the purport Prabhupada emphasizes deity worship as all-important. I want to point out that he also goes into a long harangue about the absolute necessity of “pleasing a spiritual master and following regulative principles otherwise all of your bhakti-yoga will be without effect.” Which is a bunch of nonsense, but it shows one of the reasons that Prabhupada’s books are so problematic — they are geared into making you think that without joining ISKCON and following all that Prabhupada demands from the inmates of that institution — that you cannot advance in bhakti-yoga.

In a comment I replied to kalki das:

Mahaprabhu’s teachings were focused on raganuga bhakti, whereas Prabhupada’s teachings were focused on vaidhi-bhakti. So it is very common for Prabhupada to write about vaidhi-bhakti while commenting in Caitanya Caritamrta even though the verses he is commenting on have nothing to do with vaidhi-bhakti.

Deity worship or archana is one of the limbs of vaidhi-bhakti. In ISKCON because of the over emphasis on vaidhi-bhakti it is common for devotees to become overly attached to deity worship. Because they were not taught properly the tattva and purpose of deity worship, they tend to think that deity forms are like real people, except people who demand punctual service free from all so-called “contamination” or you are greatly offending them and will be punished. It’s all quite mad.

Deity worship serves two purposes for neophyte bhaktas: It helps to focus your emotional feeling towards the conception that God is a person, not just a cosmic energy field; and it is supposed to aid in elevating bhaktas from the conception that God wants worship of the majestic “supreme lord” in fear and trepidation, towards a more intimate love based relationship, e.g. dressing and feeding like you would a child.

But because they weren’t taught properly, it is not uncommon amongst ISKCON devotees to become overly attached to deities and deity worship, as if deities are real people instead of substitutes to aid in developing intimacy and bhakti. And instead of developing intimacy and moving away from deity worship, and all worship, they tend to become even more reverential and worshipful over time. They also tend to neglect trying to develop their internal relationship with God in intimacy, and instead focus their devotion on reverential worship of deity forms.

In kalki’s response one of the things he wrote was:

[idolatry] is the danger of deity worship as you say if is not taught properly, but I know that Bhaktisddhanta Sarasvati (maybe the whole parampara), Advaita Acarya and even Lord Caitanya used to worship idols, for example when Lord Caitanya went to Ratha Yatra and worshipped Lord Jagannath, and Prabhupada used to say that there is no difference between the Lord and His Murti, so according to them the deity must be treated like a real person.

so? if they are not kanistha bhaktas why they worship deities??

Just because someone worships a deity that doesn’t mean they are necessarily kanistha or neophyte bhaktas. Deity worship is part of the vaidhi marga, it is highly recommended for those who are not on the level of raganuga bhakti. But, as Jiva Goswami writes in his Bhakti sandarbha:

In the Gautamiya Tantra it is said:

“For they who are always fallen in love with the lotus feet of Lord Krsna there is no japa, no Deity worship, no meditation, and no rules.”

When attraction (ruci) is not yet manifested even the best raganuga bhakti is considered to be mixed with vaidhi bhakti. Even a devotee who has attraction (ruci) for the Lord may, in order to benefit the people of the world, engage in raganuga bhakti mixed with vaidhi bhakti. Therefore, in some situations it is appropriate to practice raganuga bhakti mixed with vaidhi bhakti.

In order to set an example for vaidhi bhaktas a raganuga bhakta may engage in vaidhi bhakti, e.g. deity worship.

Deity worship is not supposed to be about treating deity forms as if they are literally a real person, it’s for a specific purpose. Bhaktas are supposed to transcend deity worship, not become more into it. While it is taught that a deity is non-different from who it represents, that isn’t meant to be taken literally. It is meant to inspire realization that God is in everything, and to inspire the practice of archana which will help raise the vaidhi bhakta to a level of more intimacy — if the whole process is taught properly.

But, as we can see with those who have solely or primarily gained their education in bhakti-yoga from Prabhupada, they never seem to rise above the vaidhi level. One of the symptoms of that is their over-attachment to deities and deity worship. Amongst the leading members of ISKCON it is quite common to see them have a large collection of shalagrama-shilas, or other similar worshipable objects. It reminds me of little girls being proud of their Barbie doll collections. They have different Barbie dolls with different accessories for any occasion which they like to show off to and play with their friends. Also they are very attached to bringing them wherever they go.

Bhaktas are actually meant to rise to the level of raganuga, where worship of any kind is given up for a more intimate rasa. But we don’t see that taught in ISKCON, and we don’t see that mentality from Prabhupada fanatics. We see the exact opposite — the longer you are in ISKCON the bigger your personal collection of deities becomes, along with more of your time spent doing archana. That seems to be the standard.

This is a reply to a comment from kalki das on the Narayana Maharaja’s Guru Tattva post.

kalki das wrote:

ye me bhakta-janah partha
na me bhaktas ca te janah
mad-bhaktanam ca ye bhaktas
te me bhakta-tama matah

“[Lord Krishna told Arjuna:] Those who are My direct devotees are actually not My devotees, but those who are the devotees of My servant are factually My devotees.”

I got owned with this… Krishna should I run to a vaishnava sect an become the servant of the servant of the servant of your so called servant? (leader, spiritual master obviously)

First off that translation is a bit off. It doesn’t mention “servant.” Prabhupada probably changed it to make it seem that being devoted to him was real bhakti. It says:

“Those who are devoted to me aren’t my devotees, those who are devoted to my devotees are really my devotees.”

It’s a paradoxical statement. If the real bhaktas are devoted to his devotees and not to Krishna, how can you be devoted to his devotee since anyone devoted to Krishna is not a devotee? So it’s not meant to be taken literally since it makes no sense if we do so. While it’s trying to get across the importance of being devoted to Krishna’s devotee, at the same time it’s paradoxical in order to make the point that it isn’t meant literally. Why?

Exploiter gurus use that sloka to try to get people to believe that God will reward you if you worship and serve them, and that you cannot advance and will offend Krishna if you don’t. There are a bunch of similar slokas to that one that exploiter gurus like to regularly use to get the conception across that serving them is all-important.

We need to understand why that is taught, or, have blind faith that by worshiping and serving devotees or gurus, that Krishna will magically elevate you to a higher level of consciousness and make you dear to him — and that if you don’t — then Krishna will not be pleased with you and you won’t be able to spiritually advance.

So, first thing we should wonder when hearing teachings like that is — why? Why do we find sastra saying in various places that Krishna is more pleased by you worshiping or being devoted to his devotee than devotion to himself? The answer is commonly misunderstood because exploiters misuse those teachings in trying to get people to be devoted to them. They remove the context of those teachings and thereby change their purpose in hopes of gaining your worship and service directed towards them.

What is the Vedic system supposed to be all about? It’s meant to bring you to the perfectional stage of existence. It’s meant to liberate you from samsara and give you entrance into the realm of ananda or joy. What is that joyful reality? We are taught that the ultimate destination for the soul is to awaken to our inherent relationship with God — and then to engage in lila or play with God. The ultimate goal is rasa, to experience the enjoyment of an intimate relationship with God.

How does a person attain that apotheosis? Most importantly one is advised to hear, or learn, from authoritative sources the knowledge on self-realization presented in sastra. It is through spiritual knowledge that avidya, spiritual ignorance, is cleared up. Until modern times the knowledge on God-realization found in sastra was for most people only accessible through an oral tradition. Books were rare, and people who could read sanskrit proficiently were rare. Brahmins were trained in studying sanskrit, learning rituals, yoga and memorizing sastra. Because of that they were considered to be the most important people, they were the priests and gurus of Vedic society.

In order for them to do their job they needed to spend their time in pursuit of learning sastra, teaching and priestcraft. They were supposed to be supported by everyone else because their job required total dedication to their craft. If they were bona fide brahmins they didn’t have time to do anything else. How were they to make a living if they had to spend their time and energy engrossed in brahminical duties? They weren’t supposed to charge money or work for anyone, that was believed to potentially lead to the degradation of the brahmin class. If they charged money for their services or worked for people, they could become dependent on and then used by those who pay them for unscrupulous purposes. Therefore, because they were the most exalted and important members of society, brahmins were supposed to remain independent, free from obligation to anyone, free from potentially being used by others for exploitation.

How did they survive? Why would anyone want to be a brahmin if they couldn’t make a living?

Vedic society was based upon a spiritual presumption that our lives here on Earth are for a singular purpose — to become free from samsara and attain moksha. Therefore the teachers on how to attain that purpose were taught in sastra as being the most important people in society. That is why worship and service to sadhus was stressed in sastra. In order to inspire you to do your duty in order that brahmins could remain stable as a class, there are instructions in sastra giving you incentive to do that. According to sastra it was the dharma of everyone else in society to serve the brahmins. Even today the remnants of Vedic society still exist in India and in Buddhist societies. They still have to one degree or another the tradition of it being an obligation for everyone to give charity to sadhus or monks.

In order to make everyone take seriously the importance of supporting the brahmins, you can find many places in sastra where it is said or implied that it is more important to serve or worship brahmins or gurus than to serve God, that worshiping or serving sadhus gives good karma, gives spiritual advancement, etc. Service or worship of God for an average person is an abstract concept. How can you know if your worship or service towards God is anything substantial or concrete? Therefore the Vedic system stressed service to the sadhus as the most practical service to God. It was the dharma of everyone within the Vedic social paradigm to serve the sadhus. Serving them was more important than serving God. God doesn’t need your service, brahmins or sadhus do. And everyone else needed them.

We shouldn’t misunderstand or underestimate the importance of the social context of that ideology and teaching found in sastra. Brahmins or sadhus were given supreme importance because they were the keepers of the Vedic ritualistic religion and philosophy. It wasn’t like today where all Vedic knowledge is easily and widely available for most people without dependence on an oral tradition kept by a special class of highly learned and trained holy men. We are no longer dependent on people to teach us the sastra because we can read it ourselves.

Exploiters will not admit that simple fact. In fact they always go in the opposite direction, giving more importance to service and worship of sadhus then sastra does. It’s always about their desire to gain your devotion for them. If they were truly bona fide sadhus, worthy of being seen as enlightened seers of the truth, they would know that service towards them isn’t some magical panacea which will increase the power or effectiveness of bhakti-yoga. They should see that the importance of serving and worshiping sadhus that is spoken of in sastra, was relevant in an age where society was dependent on them as keepers of sacred knowledge. They should see that today’s world has made what was once a relevant important teaching, obsolete.

Still, many or most bhaktas have been so thoroughly psychologically manipulated that they fear what I am saying will be some great offense to God if they believe it. That is the result of the exploitative manipulation they have gone through and abide in. The exploiters use fear, fear of offending God, as a means towards their ends. Most bhaktas don’t see that their theological justification or motivation for their attitudes and beliefs towards gurus — are largely fear based. The successful exploiters are quite adept at using flowery language and promises of bliss to hide their motivation for taking the role as your guru/savior. They overtly try to project a vision of their motivation as being all about selflessness, pureheartedness and compassion — while making sure you subtly or even not so subtly get the message ingrained in your psyche that doubting them, or lacking a worshipful service attitude towards them, will greatly offend God and cause you to suffer, possibly or probably in hellish conditions for many lifetimes.

http://harekrishnanews.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/sense-and-nonsensibility/

This is a reply to Raghavendu’s comment on the All You Need is Love post.

Raghavendu, You are like the proverbial person who can’t see the forest for the trees. In your latest comment you focus on something which has no real bearing, something inconsequential to what Narayana Maharaja consistently and relentlessly teaches about the absolute and pressing need to surrender to and serve a guru — without which you cannot advance, and without which Krishna will disregard you and anything else you do to advance in self-realization.

Your conception is that Narayana Maharaja doesn’t really want to exploit people because in one lecture he says something about when a disciple reaches a high enough level of bhakti, his or her relationship with the guru will be closer and friendly. I tried to find a recording of that lecture because I don’t trust the people who transcribe his English lectures (more on that below). It turns out that the lecture you quoted was spoken in Hindi, and then translated into English. I don’t speak Hindi so I can’t verify if that is an accurate translation, but knowing how they usually transcribe his lectures, I doubt very much the accuracy of that translation.

But, lets for the sake of argument, assume that it is accurate. You have posted quite a few quotes from lectures by Narayana Maharaja, are you his follower or disciple? If so, I have to inform you that you are either being disingenuous, or you are very poorly informed on how Narayana Maharaja teaches guru-tattva.

Anybody who has even a small amount of exposure to Narayana Maharaja’s teachings, like me, knows that he teaches an extremist version of guru-tattva. By extremist I mean that he consistently and regularly teaches that the only way someone can practice or advance on the path of bhakti, is by complete and total surrender and submission to the guru. He teaches that you must do nothing but what the guru wants you to do, that you must give up everything but service to the guru. And that if you don’t, there is no way you can advance on the path of bhakti-yoga. Here are a few examples:

The subject of guru-tattva is the essence of all our bhakti literature. This subject is very heavy, and therefore you should hear it with the core of your hearts. We can only worship Krishna after we have worshiped guru.

All of us in this world have turned away from Krishna. Whether we accept it or not, it is true. Although we are greatly suffering, we do not realize it. Why not? We have drunk such a large quantity of the alcohol of maya that we have become completely mad; and in this madness we think ourselves very happy. You should know that one day you will have to give up your bodies and all that you have collected in this world. One day you will surely have to be old. Old age is very eagerly waiting to embrace you, and none of you will escape it. A devotee of the caliber of Sri Narada Muni can escape this maya and its presentation of old age, but you are not like Narada Muni. You will have to suffer if you are not careful. It is stated in the Vedas:

yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah

(Svetasvatara Upanishad 6.23)

“Only unto those great souls who have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of Vedic knowledge automatically revealed.”

This instruction has been given since ancient times: “Yasya deve para bhaktir.” Those who are suffering and who want to be happy in this world and in the next, especially those living in the present age of quarrel and hypocrisy called Kali-yuga, should serve Krishna, the Supreme Lord. And, not less than Him, such persons must serve the bona fide gurudeva. Here in this verse the word para-bhakti has been used, and we should therefore know its meaning:

anyabhilashita-sunyam
jnana-karmady-anavritam
anukulyena krishnanusilanam
bhaktir uttama

(Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu 1.1.11)

“The cultivation of activities which are meant exclusively for the pleasure of Sri Krishna, or, in other words, the uninterrupted flow of service to Sri Krishna, performed through all endeavors of the body, mind and speech, and through the expression of various spiritual sentiments (bhavas), which is not covered by jnana and karma, and which is devoid of all desires other than the aspiration to bring happiness to Sri Krishna, is called uttama-bhakti, pure devotional service.”

Para-bhakti is the continuous, uninterrupted flow of the activities performed by our body, mind, words and moods (bhavas), which are executed only for the benefit of Krishna. Such activities are not disturbed or covered by jnana (mental speculation or knowledge leading to impersonal liberation) and karma (the desire to enjoy the fruits of ones activities), and it is performed under the guidance of guru-tattva. If there is a lack of the above symptoms in a devotee’s activities but bhakti is there to some degree, we can still call it bhakti – but not para bhakti.

The Vedas tell us that para-bhakti is certainly to be applied to Krishna, but first it must be applied to guru. If one has no guru, all his devotional activities will be like zero; only worldly fruits will come. If one thinks, “I am already chanting, remembering and performing arcana (regulative worship of the Deity),” but he is not truly initiated by a bona fide guru, the fruit of his activities will only be worldly. Intoxicated by sense enjoyment such a person may think himself happy, but he will not be actually happy. It is therefore stated in sastra:

brahmanda bhramite kona bhagyavan jiva
guru-krishna-prasade paya bhakti-lata-bija

(Sri Caitanya-caritamrita, Madhya-lila 19.151)

“According to their karma, all living entities are wandering throughout the entire universe. Some of them are being elevated to the upper planetary systems, and some are going down into the lower planetary systems. Out of many millions of wandering living entities, one who is very fortunate gets an opportunity to associate with a bona fide spiritual master by the grace of Krishna. By the mercy of both Krishna and the spiritual master, such a person receives the seed of the creeper of devotional service.”

What is the meaning of guru-krishna-prasade? This generally means that one can attain the bhakti-lata-bija – the seed of parabhakti – by the combined mercy of guru and Krishna. In this connection, however, there is another meaning. Here the meaning is that the bona fide guru is a manifestation of Krishna Himself. Krishna does not come to us, but the guru may come, as Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja came and traveled everywhere. You should realize that the mercy of Krishna first manifests as the mercy of guru. From the bona fide guru, who is Krishna Himself as His manifestation (asrayavigraha), we can have the seed of bhakti. What is the the seed of bhakti? It is krishna-seva-vasana, the desire to serve Krishna. This desire will come only from gurudeva, the bona fide Vaishnava, and it does not matter whether he is acting as a siksha-guru or a diksha-guru. He may act as a siksha-guru in the case of a disciple who is initiated by a bona fide guru but he cannot avail his siksha. The seed of the bhakti creeper comes from this high class of gurudeva, and that is why sastra states:

yasya deve para bhaktir
yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah
prakasante mahatmanah

One can know who is Krishna only from gurudeva, and if a guru is not bona fide, Krishna cannot be known. Among the 64 limbs of bhakti described in Sri Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu, the first four are in relation to sri gurudeva. The first is guru-padasraya, which means acceptance of the shelter of the lotus feet of gurudeva, and that shelter is taken through hearing. That is harinama initiation in the real sense. Those who take shelter of such a guru can progress quickly in bhakti. After guru-padasraya, there is diksha and siksha. Diksha means initiation and siksha means instruction. The disciple will begin to understand his gurudeva’s instructions, and then he will try to follow them. You should take initiation from that guru, but be very careful. If a guru is bona fide and you have some doubt in his character or teachings, Krishna will never accept you.

yasya prasadad bhagavat-prasado
yasyaprasadan na gatih kuto ’pi
dhyayam stuvams tasya yasas tri-sandhyam
vande guroh sri-caranaravindam

(Sri Gurvashtakam 8)

“Only by the mercy of sri gurudeva can one receive the mercy of Krishna; without his grace the living entities cannot make any advancement or be delivered. I meditate three times a day on the glories of sri gurudeva and recite stava-stuti (prayers) unto his lotus feet.”

ajnas casraddadhanas ca
samsayatma vinasyati
nayam loko ’sti na paro
na sukham samsayatmanah

(Bhagavad-gita 4.40)

“Ignorant and faithless persons who doubt the revealed scriptures do not attain God consciousness; they fall down. For the doubting soul there is happiness neither in this world nor in the next.”

Suppose a guru is bona fide, and he is preaching and serving his gurudeva. If anyone doubts him and thinks, “My gurudeva is an ordinary man and he does not know this and that,” or “I know better than him, at least in ordinary matters,” that person falls down from Krishna consciousness and no one will be able to save him. We should be very careful not to associate with such a person. Also, do not associate with anyone who associates with that type of wretched person. Try to behave as you would behave regarding the passing of stool. If we can pass stool easily, we are very happy. We feel great relief if there is a motion. If the stool remains inside the body, we will be restless. We will not be able to do bhakti or anything else. Similarly, you will surely have to give up bad association for your entire life. If you want bhakti, if you want to become Krishna conscious, then do not mix with those persons who doubt a guru who is bona fide, who is serving his gurudeva, and who is preaching throughout the world.

And also another example:

Have you heard of Upamanyu? His guru once told him,

“Oh, you go out to graze cows all day and you do not bring with you anything to eat, and yet you are very healthy and fat.
Why is that? Do you drink milk from the cows’ udders?”

Upamanyu replied, “Yes I do.”

His guru told him, “Don’t drink it anymore,”

But he did not tell him what he would be allowed to eat or drink. During
the next days, Upamanyu continued to go out. After some days his
guru said,

“You still look very fat. Are you drinking milk? What are
you doing?”

Upamanyu told him,

“I am only eating the foam that accumulates on the mouth of the cows – nothing else.”

His guru then asked him,

“Have I told you to eat that? Don’t eat it.”

Then, without Upamanyu asking what to eat and without his gurudeva telling him what he would be allowed to eat, gurudeva went away. His gurudeva was not actually displeased with him. He was only acting displeased in order to test his disciple’s obedience. On the next day the cows returned without Upamanyu, and his guru went out in search for him. He called out,

“Upamanyu, where are you? Where are you?”

He heard a sound from the well, and that sound was the voice of Upamanyu calling,

“Gurudeva, I am here in this well.”

Gurudeva asked,

“What are you doing in there?”

Upamanyu replied,

“Gurudeva, you told me not to take milk or foam. So I became so hungry that I drank the milk of a leaf of an ekwan plant – and then I discovered that it was poisonous. By drinking it, I became totally blind.”

Now showing his pleasure, Upamanyu’s guru said,

“You have followed my instructions!”

He took him out of the well and blessed him by saying,

“All the knowledge of the Vedas will now enter your heart.”

Then, at once, all the scriptures (like Srutis, Vedas, Upanishads) and all varieties of knowledge were inspired in his heart. In the history of Aruni, and also in the history of Sudama and Krishna, we find similar miraculous results as the fruit of surrender to sri gurudeva. There is no possibility of attaining bhakti if we do not totally follow our gurudeva.

As I have repeated many times before, the teachings about the positions of the guru taught in sastra, or by past acharyas, are relative to the kala, desa, patra — time, place and circumstance, and person. In the pre-modern age the written word was very rare, only a few knew how to read sanskrit in comparison to the whole of Indian society, and the tradition was therefore mostly an oral one.

Brahmins were supposed to be trained in memorizing the sastra, then they would teach Vedanta to the rest of society. Brahmins were the gurus of society. Of course not all brahmins were qualified to be spiritual masters. But the ones that were is what sastra and past acharyas speak of. Because they were repositories of Vedic knowledge, and because they were the sole source for most everyone for comprehensive Vedanta, therefore they are given great emphasis as the most important people in society. They were to be respected as God because they were the sole source, for most everyone, for God’s instructions from sastra.

Sastra says the guru is to be seen as God’s representative because they were walking talking sastra. Almost everyone was completely dependent on gurus for knowledge on self-realization and Vedic tattva. Surrendering to them was meant in the context of a teacher/student relationship, and service to them was guru-daksina, payment in kind for the guru’s services, i.e. teaching you. That guru-daksina could be in physical service or it could be in gifts. If you were poor you would do some service for the guru, or his family if he was married. If you could afford it you would give the guru money and gifts.

It was all about making sure the guru didn’t have to make a living other than by teaching. You paid the guru just like you pay to go to the university today. It wasn’t about what so many modern gurus teach today, where they interpret surrender and submission and service to a guru to mean giving your entire life as a slave to a guru. Surrender and submission originally meant to surrender your time to learn the teachings of the guru, and to submit to what he taught, e.g. chanting, meditation, archana, yajna, etc.

All of that reality changed once mass communication made sastra easily available for most people. Modern technology combined with translations of sastra has made the teachings on the necessity of a guru found in sastra and from previous acharyas — no longer relevant. We are no longer dependent on an oral tradition, therefore we are no longer dependent on the keepers of that tradition.

But today we see that most all gurus will not admit that reality, in fact they go in the extreme opposite direction, insisting that even if you have all the knowledge and mantras necessary, that without surrendering to and serving a guru, you still cannot advance, your mantras will be useless, and Krishna will despise or ignore you.

That is ignorance and or exploitation Raghavendu, nothing more, nothing less.

Next I wanted to showcase how Narayana Maharaja’s English lectures are changed when they are transcribed. I don’t speak Hindi so I can’t judge his Hindi to English transcriptions, nor his transcriptions into other langauges.

What follows is a comparison between his actual words and what appears on his website as a transcription of the same part of the same lecture. This is mostly about guru-tattva according to Narayana Maharaja. The part in bold is what Narayana Maharaja actually says, the other part is what is transcribed on his website.

If Sri Krsna is embracing Srimati Radhika or kissing Her, it may seem like mundane lust, but there is so much difference between the two.

If Krsna is embracing Radhika, making (hindi word, someone from audience says “kissing”) what is that? They say like, mundane prem. But so much difference, so much difference.

Raganuga sadhana-bhajana is more powerful then vaidhi sadhana. I have told you so many truths about this topic, and about the sweet pastimes of Krsna and Srimati Radhika.

So, raganuga sadhana-bhajana is more powerful then vaidhi sadhana. I’m telling so many things about these things. Sweet pastimes of Krsna and Radhika.

I have explained to you Caitanya-caritamrta; that is, Raya Ramananda Samvad, Rupa-siksa, Sanatana-siksa and so many other topics. You should understand that all these topics are raganuga.

I’m telling you Caitanya Caritamrta. Ramananda Samvad, Rupa-siksa, Sanatana-siksa, so many things. All are raganuga, you should understand.

If you are sincere, loyal to Guru and our scriptures like Srimad-Bhagavatam and others, and have no envy towards anyone, you can very quickly achieve this path of raganuga.”

Very soon it will take you, if you are sincere, loyal to guru, loyal to all these scriptures, Srimad Bhagavatam and others, no (hindi word, someone in audience says “envy”) to anyone, then very soon, you can achieve this raganuga marg.

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura writes in his book, Bhagavata-arka-marici-mala, “First I will first explain vaidhi-bhakti, and then raganuga-bhakti.” He quotes the following verse:

nr-deham adyam su-labham su-durlabham
plavam su-kalpam guru-karnadharam
mayanukulena nabhasvateritam
puman bhavabdhim na taret sa atma-ha

First I will tell, on vaidhi bhakti, who is telling? Bhaktivinoda Thakura. First I will tell something about vaidhi bhakti and then I will about raganuga.

(has conversation with devotees about having a kirtan, then they have kirtan, when kirtan ends he starts chanting this verse)

nr-deham adyam su-labham su-durlabham
plavam su-kalpam guru-karnadharam
mayanukulena nabhasvateritam
puman bhavabdhim na taret sa atma-ha

In this verse Srila Sukadeva Gosvami is indicating to Maharaja Pariksit, “Katvanga Maharaja attained Krsna-bhakti and went to Vaikuntha in only twelve minutes. You have seven days left to live, and so you can achieve more than he did.”

Sukadeva Goswami is telling to Pariksit “If Katvanga may can have Krsna bhakti, and went to where? Vaikuntha, in only twelve minutes, You have seven days, You have seven days, oh, you can do more than him?

In this human form of life you can fulfill all your desires. Although it is very rare to attain this human form, we now have it.

nr-deham adyam su-labham su-durlabham, this human form, adyam, by this you can fulfill all you desires, su-durlabham, nr-deham, su-labham. Very, very, rare, what, now that he have human form. And how? (talks with devotees about some music he hears in the background) What is this?

“Plavam” – to cross a river or ocean, a very strong boat is needed, and this human form is compared to that well-constructed boat.

This is durla labham, so durlabham plavam. Sukadeva (garbled word) to cross a river or ocean, very strong boat is needed.

“Guru karnadharam” – if you are sitting on a boat that is without a captain, you will drown in the ocean.

So this is boat, and guru karnadharam, if boat is there, and he was sitting on that, (someone from audience says “and no captain”) and no captain, that will be, oh, you’ll drown, in ocean.

You have received a very elevated Guru, like Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja, like our guru-parampara, like Srila Rupa Gosvami and others.

So guru karnadharam, like shipyard, very high class of guru, like Swamiji, like your all guru parampara Rupa Goswami and others.

Sri Guru is very expert in sailing the boat and giving directions, telling us where to go. He will say, “Our goal is radha-dasyam. Our boat will go there.”

He’s karnadharam, very expert in sailing boat, giving direction, giving direction where? His goal is back to God, that I told, Of Krs, Radha dasyam, our boat will go there.

“Mayanukulena” – if there are favorable winds and the boat has good sails, and if the boatman is very expert, we will cross the river or ocean in no time.

And guru is very expert, mayanukulena. If, there is terrible wind, and we have, sail, in no time we cross. (hindi or sanskrit garbled) and with very fast, (hindi or sanskrit garbled) what is that? (sanskrit word) sadhu sanga.

I have given you very high sadhu-sanga. Having all these facilities and favorable situations, if you do not take advantage, you will be hurled into the cycle of endless birth and death – coming, going, coming, going – for many future births.

You see? How boat is sadhu sanga? Having all these facilities and favorable things, you have all, but (sanskrit word) if you are not crossing (people give suggestions for words) what, what, (garbled sanskrit) endless (garbled sanskrit) coming going, coming going, endless, and in front of us, future, also many. No end, but guru he is expertive, anukula, by he is there, sadhu sanga is there, boat in no time you can cross.

Despite having all these facilities, if you are envious, if you are quarrelling with others, criticizing others and always searching for some hole in others; if you are not seeing what you yourself are doing wrong, you will be committing spiritual suicide. You will be the killer of your own soul, and others’ as well

And those having all these facilities quarreling themself, have envious, criticizing others, not seen to us them what I’m doing. Wrong, but always searching some hole in others, then what will be? Atmaha, atmaha means? all suicide. You’re suiciding your own soul and others also.

This next bit is from the same lecture a little further along where he talks more about guru-tattva:

Don’t have any duplicity. Don’t try to hide anything from Gurudeva. Totally surrender to him. All your actions should be to please that perfect Guru.

Don’t have any (hindi) malice (someone in audience says duplicity) duplicity. Anything, nothing, amaya niskapa, impure way, nothing hiding anything from gurudeva, totally surrendered. Always, his all action will be to please gurudeva.

The real Guru is not an ordinary human being, like so-called gurus here and there.

And gurudevas will be also standard, not like here and there.

If one opens his heart to that bona fide Guru, without hiding anything, he will then open his own heart; he will give everything to that surrendered disciple.

And then (hindi or sanskrit) without him hiding anything, purely. And then, what gurudeva will tell? Then he will open his heart, and give everything to them.

On the other hand, to those who try to hide something, that Guru, who has learned everything from “tricky” Krsna, will also be very “tricky.”

And those who will hide something, he’s expert, in (hindi or sanskrit) because gurudeva has learned everything from tricky Krsna (laughter from audience)

Sri Guru has two forms. One is God, Krsna, and one is Krsna’s devotee. Krsna is most rasika and has all other unfathomable qualities.

Then he can to see (sanskrit) atma, atma (sanskrit) means Krsna. He’s most rasik, he’s everything. (sanskrit) nothing (sanskrit) so, you should have strong belief in this things and have such kind of faith in guru.

http://harekrishnanews.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/prabhupada-is-always-right/

This is a reply to a comment from Vaisnavi to the Day Trippers post.

If someone asks you – a newbie, or someone who only knows little of bhakti-yoga (I am really a part of this group, too, despite being in iskcon for a while now): How can I practice bhakti? How can I learn to love Radha-Krishna and live and love with them eternally? How should I live my life (lifestyle, etc.) to attain prema? How would you answer them?

You have such a gift of being able to explain bhakti-yoga in a clear, sane and beautiful way that I am curious to hear you explain bhakti to someone who’s new to it and wants to take it up (bhakti 101, in a way)… All I could come up would be some iskcon version all about the 4 regs., importance of being celibate, vegetarian and chanting lots. I assume you would have something wiser and deeper to say

What new people should do is the same thing more experienced bhaktas should do:

Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 7.5.23-24

śrī-prahrāda uvāca

śravaṇaḿ kīrtanaḿ viṣṇoḥ
smaraṇaḿ pāda-sevanam
arcanaḿ vandanaḿ dāsyaḿ
sakhyam ātma-nivedanam

iti puḿsārpitā viṣṇau
bhaktiś cen nava-lakṣaṇā
kriyeta bhagavaty addhā
tan manye ‘dhītam uttamam

SYNONYMS

śrī-prahrādaḥ uvāca — Prahlāda Mahārāja said; śravaṇam — hearing; kīrtanam — chanting; viṣṇoḥ — of Lord Viṣṇu (not anyone else); smaraṇam — remembering; pāda-sevanam — serving the feet; arcanam — offering worship (with ṣoḍaśopacāra, the sixteen kinds of paraphernalia); vandanam — offering prayers; dāsyam — becoming the servant; sakhyam — becoming the best friend; ātma-nivedanam — surrendering everything, whatever one has; iti — thus; puḿsā arpitā — offered by the devotee; viṣṇau — unto Lord Viṣṇu (not to anyone else); bhaktiḥ — devotional service; cet — if; nava-lakṣaṇā — possessing nine different processes; kriyeta — one should perform; bhagavati — unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead; addhā — directly or completely; tat — that; manye — I consider; adhītam — learning; uttamam — topmost.

TRANSLATION

Prahlāda Mahārāja said: Hearing and chanting about the transcendental holy name, form, qualities, paraphernalia and pastimes of Lord Viṣṇu, remembering them, serving the lotus feet of the Lord, offering the Lord respectful worship with sixteen types of paraphernalia, offering prayers to the Lord, becoming His servant, considering the Lord one’s best friend, and surrendering everything unto Him (in other words, serving Him with the body, mind and words) — these nine processes are accepted as pure devotional service. One who has dedicated his life to the service of Kṛṣṇa through these nine methods should be understood to be the most learned person, for he has acquired complete knowledge.

While the above is not a perfect translation, it is the basics which new bhaktas should be taught. The process of bhakti-yoga is pretty well laid out in Bhakti-Rasamrita-Sindhu and other books. But, always the most important part of bhakti is sravanam, hearing from authoritative sources. It is through knowledge whereby avidya is destroyed, and it is avidya which keeps us as baddha-jivas or conditioned souls. So for newbies I would stress studying, I would advise them to avoid Prabhupada’s books. If they ask tell them Prabhupada’s books are focused on trying to get people to join ISKCON, as are the leaders of ISKCON who edit his books. Prabhupada or his editors change philosophical conceptions and meanings of words all throughout their books and lectures from their original intent in order to convince people that surrendering to ISKCON is the essence of bhakti-yoga.

For example in the above ātma-nivedanam is translated in the word for word as: “surrendering everything, whatever one has” and in the translation as: “surrendering everything unto Him (in other words, serving Him with the body, mind and words)”

The modern common usage of nivedanam is “sacrificial offering,” as in some food offered to a deity is commonly called nivedanam in Hinduism. Atma means the soul, the person inside the body. So in common usage today atma-nivedanam means “making an offering of yourself to Krishna.”

Prabhupada and most other Gaudiya gurus translate and contextualize it to mean giving everything you own and all your energy (physical service) to Krishna. Of course they also instruct us that can only be properly done through a guru, since he represents Krishna in this world.

Here is the literal meaning of nivedanam:

a. announcing, making known; n. communication, announcement; offering; -vedin, a. announcing, making known; offering (–°ree;); -vedya, fp. to be reported; n. offering of food to an idol; -vesá, m. enter ing into; settling; encampment, camp; habitation, residence; settling down, marriage, matrimony; foundation (of a city); building, edifice; impression, mark; -vésana, a. (î) entering into (–°ree;); laying to rest; sheltering; n. entrance; setting down; introduction, ap plication; causing to encamp; settling down, marrying; resting-place, bed, lair, nest; home, abode, dwelling; -vesanîya, fp. to be put down; -vesayitavya, fp. to be placed; -vesa vat, a. lying on (–°ree;); -vesin, a. lying near, being in, resting or based on (–°ree;).

The main meaning is about communicating in some way, and the secondary meanings are about making an offering and about getting close and a place to live.

Atma-nivedanam means trying to communicate with Krishna, offering yourself as available to live with, giving yourself over to being with Krishna, in the here and now, from within. It means to try to directly communicate and relate with Krishna in a close relationship, not giving stuff to and working for a guru.

For beginners I would advise them that in any religion or in any yoga tradition there are plenty of people in the guise of gurus who are unqualified and who seek to exploit people in various ways. In the Gaudiya tradition they have changed the essential meaning of bhakti-yoga from focusing on learning about self-realization and an internal development of our relationship with God, into being almost exclusively about “devotional service.” They will tell you, and their books will make it seem like they are right, that bhakti-yoga is first and foremost about finding and submitting to a guru. From then on, service to that guru is what bhakti revolves around — according to them and their mistranslated and deceptive books. They will tell you to study, chant, worship, etc. But all within the wider context of the urgent importance and focus of dedicating yourself to a guru and doing physical service for him, and serving in his mission with others.

They (more so in ISKCON than with others) try to make it seem as if there is a constant state of emergency in the world because of a lack of Krishna consciousness, and that it’s their job to save everyone and the world as fast as they can. The gurus instill that mentality into the followers, and then it becomes conventional wisdom, or a meme which infects their minds with the conception of:

“Pleasing guru and Krishna is the only thing worth doing, everything else is wrong and harmful and sinful in some way. Guru and Krishna wants us to try to save the fallen conditioned souls rotting in this world more than anything. The best thing I can do is to fully dedicate myself to serving guru and Krishna in saving the people of the world from going to hell, while giving up all desires for my own selfish sense gratification.”

Of course not all bhaktas actually go through with making the above conception a physical real world reality for themselves, but many do. And if they stop, or never really “fully surrender” by becoming a single minded passionate dedicated slave to the guru or his organization, still, the above mentality has become for so many the essential meaning of bhakti, i.e. “devotional service” through helping the guru save the “fallen sinful people of the world” is the essence of bhakti. Often they feel bad about themselves and see others like them as fallen and bad in some way as well if they are not living up to their perceived vision of the perfect lifestyle. Because of that they then see themselves as too fallen to try to practice real bhakti-yoga, e.g. trying to relate with and develop an intimate relationship with Radha Krishna is not for them because they are bad people who Krishna is disgusted with. They become judgmental towards others and themselves for not dedicating themselves fully to serving their gurus and organizations, as if that is the defining quality of a person’s character and level of spiritual advancement.

So, while association with a community of bhaktas is good for people new to bhakti-yoga, there are pitfalls that need to be avoided in order to not fall into an exploitative situation which may damage your faith.

This is a reply to Seeker’s comment on the Superstar post.

Seeker wrote:

I am able to understand the gratitude that the innocent followers may have developed for Prabhupada which causes them go into a denial mode while hearing a critical analysis of his words or deeds. However, even they would try to rationalize his mistakes by either citing his good intentions or by citing a few counter-examples to refute the issue at hand.

I was not so much surprised to see Narayana Maharaj blaming the editors for the mistranslation in Prabhupada’s books despite Prabhupada’s expansion of the same theme (women as papa-yoni) in his various lectures. However, what is the need for attributing omniscience to Prabhupada? Does Narayan Maharaj really believe that Prabhupada was omniscient or does he say so to feed the sentiments of his followers? I don’t know which is worse.

I would be happy to hear out your thoughts on this issue.

Narayana Maharaja has this habit of telling people that the highest level guru is omniscient, not just Prabhupada. He wants people to see himself as some omniscient god-like super mystic so that they will be more inclined to support and surrender to him and his organization.

Prabhupada denied that he was omniscient btw.

Jayadvaita: …they know everything and they’re perfect in everything. But sometimes, from our material viewpoint, we see some discrepancies. Just like we think that…

Prabhupada: Because material viewpoint. The viewpoint is wrong; therefore you find discrepancies.

Jayadvaita: So we should think that we have the defect.

Prabhupada: Yes. Acarya is explained, bhakti-samsanah: “One who’s preaching the cult of devotional service, he’s acarya.” Then why should you find any discrepancy?

Jayadvaita: Because we see… For instance, sometimes the acarya may seem to forget something or not to know something, so from our point of view, if someone has forgotten, that is…

Prabhupada: No, no, no. Then…

Jayadvaita: …an imperfection.

Prabhupada: That is not the… Then you do not understand. Acarya is not God, omniscient. He is servant of God. His business is to preach bhakti cult. That is acarya.

Jayadvaita: And that is the perfection.

Prabhupada: That is the perfection. Hare Krsna.

Jayadvaita: So we have a misunderstanding about what perfection is?

Prabhupada: Yes. Perfection is here, how he is preaching bhakti cult. That’s all.

Many devotees within and outside of ISKCON think that their guru can hear their prayers or read their minds, that’s a type of omniscience. But when asked if he had that ability Prabhupada gave a sort of denial:

Regarding your questions are the Spiritual Master and the Grand Spiritual Master consciously aware of the prayers of a sincere devotee who prays in love to Them?–the answer is that no conscious prayers go in vain. They are transmitted positively. But one thing you must know that any prayer you offer to your Spiritual Master and Superior Spiritual Master, all of them are conveyed to Krishna, so no sincere prayers go in vain.

Prabhupada was smart enough to realize that he shouldn’t tell people that he had all sorts of mystic abilities. Once you do that it’s easy for people to lose faith in you if you seem to lack those powers at any given time. Narayana Maharaja doesn’t seem to care, or he doesn’t realize the risk of putting himself on such a god-like level.

Narayana Maharaja teaches differently from Prabhupada in that he tries to get people to believe that the guru (i.e. himself) has super mystic powers, such as omniscience.What’s funny is that in the quote of his you provide he gives himself an out for when it seems like a guru isn’t omniscient — saying that if it seems like a guru makes a mistake or seems to be ignorant in some way or another — that they are like God in lila — just pretending to be human. As obvious a ploy as that is, many people still think he is the highest level bhakta. Why? Because he is learned and is able to communicate what he has learned. Foolishly, most devotees will determine how advanced someone is according to their ability to speak or write — it doesn’t even have to be anything very deep — it just needs to appear to be comprehensive and detailed, especially when it comes to knowledge of lila. That’s why you see that the most popular gurus are the ones who speak a lot about lila, e.g. Radhanatha Swami, Narayana Maharaja.

This is the problem with most gurus today — they promote themselves as being something they are not. Whether it’s that they have mystic powers; or that they are “pure representatives of Krishna;” or that they are on the highest level of bhakti by dint of their knowledge (ability to repeat what they have read) of lila. Or, that they have some special understanding that other gurus don’t have. That is what is behind the kerfuffle between Tripurari and Narayana Maharaja. They both want to come across as knowing the secret of who Prabhupada is in Krishna lila so as to appear superior to other gurus.

Tripurari’s tries to put across the conception that he is a special guru, superior to others who are not as rational and modern as he is, yet at the same time more thoroughly versed in the minutiae of lila. He rejects Narayana Maharaja’s opinions and Prabhupada’s opinions, and unlike most of the other Sridhar Maharaja followers — he wouldn’t work with Govinda Maharaja. He praises and says that Prabhupada was the highest level devotee possible, but, he disagrees with various things Prabhupada said. He wants it both ways — he wants to come across as “recognizing and worshiping” Prabhupada as the highest level mahabhagavat, but guess what — he’s even higher because he doesn’t make the mistakes Prabhupada made, e.g:

Prabhupada teaching that we came from or can fall down from the spiritual world; teaching that women are papa-yoni; teaching that procreative sex is the only sex God allows humans to have otherwise it is a sin; teaching that raganuga is only for “liberated self-realized pure devotees” otherwise you will become a “sahajiya and a demon;” teaching that the moon landing hoax conspiracy theory is true because it is impossible to go to the moon; teaching that girls shouldn’t be educated beyond reading and writing otherwise they will become prostitutes; saying that women who aren’t married or who get an education and aspire to something other than being a housewife are prostitutes; divorce is always the fault of women; feminism is a plot by men to exploit women for sex; there have never been women scientists, mathematicians, or philosophers in all of human history; after men have too much sex with women they become impotent — and that is the cause of homosexuality; that black people should be forced into and would be satisfied being slaves; the moon is further away from the earth than the sun, etc.

Tripurari disagrees with all of those teachings — yet Prabhupada insisted that it was all true. Prabhupada insisted that we should accept it all as Krishna’s holy absolute truth because he was simply a “transparent via medium” who was only giving us Krishna’s opinions, not his own. And, according to Tripurari, Prabhupada was in fact Krishna’s highest level pure representative. Tripurari has somehow convinced his followers that he isn’t being disingenuous by that type of sophistry? It’s probably because of what I wrote above — he’s like Radhanath Swami to them. Radhanath Swami is the most popular ISKCON guru even though he has a very troubling past. It’s because when he lectures he mostly talks about various stories and pastimes from various scriptures that the audience is often unaware of, he seems to be special and deep to them because, well, they think that is what special deep devotees do. They don’t realize that just because he has read more than them and is able to remember what he has read and tell it back to them in a somewhat skillful manner — that it doesn’t say anything about his character or level of self-realization.

Universities are full of teachers who specialize in certain genres of literature who can expound endlessly on what they have learned in an entertaining manner. It’s a skill of the intellectual, it doesn’t say anything about their personal character or level of spiritual awareness. Being able to tell stories and repeat what you have read from Vedic literature is no different. It’s an intellectual skill, not a sign of spiritual advancement. Narayana Maharaja is popular for that reason as well — he mainly just tells a lot of stories.

People who are not self-realized but who are trying to be Gaudiya Vaishnava gurus and gather followers, are only successful if they are able to convince people that they are more spiritually advanced than them. Because they are not self-realized they usually don’t understand or give much importance to the teachings on self-realization found in the Gita, Bhagavatam, etc. What they teach is usually focused on stories and minutiae from lila, and about the all-importance of following vaidhi sadhana-bhakti very strictly, e.g. this world is full of misery caused by you being a fallen worthless piece of crap who needs to give up everything in life but serving me – because I am Krishna’s representative who can magically give you his “mercy” by which you will no longer desire to do anything but “devotional service.”

http://harekrishnanews.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/noah-where-to-hide/