Many participants onboard share a history as members of ISKCON or Gaudiya Matha, and therefore may need to discuss related issues. Please do not use this section as a battleground, there are other forums for that purpose.
Gaudiya Matha's guru-pranali - Skipping over?
betal_nut - Mon, 01 Mar 2004 09:05:58 +0530
Hare Krishna
You've probably already discussed this thread-bare in a thread long ago but I will ask anyway...
QUOTE
"Very good, sir, from the bottom of my heart I respect the wonderful parampara-philosophy of yours in which people of the guru-pranali don't have to even meet others." No, we say, "Excuse me, sir, but the philosophy in which people of one's guru-pranali have never met each other is rather absurd when examined with the eyes of the scripture and the tradition of saints."
My impression is that the guru parampara as presented by BSST is not neccessarily skipping over gurus or rendering them "invalid", but rather giving a list of prominant acharyas who shared the same mood or ideal.
Is my understanding correct or not?
Madhava - Mon, 01 Mar 2004 14:19:25 +0530
Depending on whom you ask. If you ask me, then yes, that's what he did.
Gaurasundara - Mon, 01 Mar 2004 15:36:17 +0530
Yes,... depending on whom you ask. That's a good answer Madhavaji.
Anand - Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:55:21 +0530
Betalji, if you want good answers for your questions, may I suggest you should try asking the candyman.
When I first came in contact with Krsna Consciousness it was through a book called "Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers." The answers being perfect was a given since A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami was, in the book, the one answering. But I remember being intrigued by the concept of a question being "perfect", or not. Henceforward I always wondered whether my own questions were perfect or whether imperfect questions, depending who you ask, are alowed at all. When I first met (in Vrndavan) the man who was making the questions in that book, his first question to me was whether I was from a Nazi back ground. I thought I was supposed to give some sastric response to that but was unable to so I told him the truth, which I considered irrelevant and still do.
Madhava - Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:06:48 +0530
Maybe I should become a politician.
Anand - Tue, 02 Mar 2004 03:50:20 +0530
But who would help us, then?
Rasaraja dasa - Tue, 02 Mar 2004 11:24:35 +0530
QUOTE(betal_nut @ Feb 29 2004, 07:35 PM)
My impression is that the guru parampara as presented by BSST is not neccessarily skipping over gurus or rendering them "invalid", but rather giving a list of prominant acharyas who shared the same mood or ideal.
Is my understanding correct or not?
Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.
I would say that your interpretation is correct. Obviously BSST, and consequently BSM, didn’t advocate the understanding that the list they have given in their writings was the Parampara in it’s entirety. It seems that the Parampara in their books was what they perceived as a “Best of”.
At the same time I think there is also merit that BSST was making a subtle, or maybe not so subtle, statement that some within his given Parampara, assuming he was initiated by GKDB, were in some respects less important. The point that BSST doesn’t seem to offer respect to the individuals within his specific line would infer, or at least leave open the door, to such as assumption.
I would say that we can each draw conclusions on this but no one can answer with 100% confidence. From what I have read I would say that it is quiet plausible that the second possibility is possible based on the fact that most speak of their particular line to stress the authenticity, as well as their appreciation and gratitude, towards their specific Gaurdians. For BSST not to do that makes such a question valid.
Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa
betal_nut - Tue, 02 Mar 2004 21:53:00 +0530
I don't get the statement below.......
QUOTE
Betalji, if you want good answers for your questions, may I suggest you should try asking the candyman.
When I first came in contact with Krsna Consciousness it was through a book called "Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers." The answers being perfect was a given since A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami was, in the book, the one answering. But I remember being intrigued by the concept of a question being "perfect", or not. Henceforward I always wondered whether my own questions were perfect or whether imperfect questions, depending who you ask, are alowed at all. When I first met (in Vrndavan) the man who was making the questions in that book, his first question to me was whether I was from a Nazi back ground. I thought I was supposed to give some sastric response to that but was unable to so I told him the truth, which I considered irrelevant and still do.
Anand - Wed, 03 Mar 2004 01:22:58 +0530
It has something to do with questions. And who answers them.