Google
Web         Gaudiya Discussions
Gaudiya Discussions Archive » OTHER TOPICS
The ultimate nowhere-land. Whatever doesn't seem to fit in any of the other categories, post it in here. For example, discussions on Mahatma Gandhi and the latest news on CNN should go here.

A few remarks on publishing books -



Advaitadas - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 19:55:38 +0530

[ Please read the context for this discussion first: Errata and Suggestions on GTV ]

QUOTE(Madhava to Jagat)
Thank you for the valuable feedback, it'll be incorporated into future editions.


Reminder that if you publish any of my original translation work edited by Brzezinski that my name should be removed as a translator. I will not put my signature under any of his work.
Madhava - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:30:53 +0530
All right, we'll do that if you so wish. Would you rather have us label those as "translated as the joint effort of several devotees"? Though you are of course behind the hardest work, with all the revising, checking against the original and editing going on that's practically what it's turning into.
Advaitadas - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 20:42:48 +0530
Thank you for your appreciation. The choice is yours. Either Brzezinski or me. You cant have us both. I will certainly not have my name in a list that includes his too. Practically speaking, the alternatives are that you leave my work intact, or have someone else edit it....
Jagat - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:11:14 +0530
Thanks for drawing my attention to these suggestions again, Advaitaji. There were a couple of commas that needed placing.

Your servant, Jagat.

Advaitadas - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:29:38 +0530
QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep 16 2005, 03:12 PM)
Thank you for your appreciation. The choice is yours. Either Brzezinski or me. You cant have us both. I will certainly not have my name in a list that includes his too. Practically speaking, the alternatives are that you leave my work intact, or have someone else edit it....



Scrap this. Take my name off the next edition in any case, even without a single comma from JB....
Madhava - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 21:53:14 +0530
All right, that is certainly a choice that is yours to make as you wish. Actually, wasn't this agreed on already a while back when you wrote to Babaji Maharaj about not wanting to be mentioned as a translator?
Advaitadas - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:21:29 +0530
Yes indeed. Though the addition of J's editing certainly adds to my motivation to drop out.
Madhava - Fri, 16 Sep 2005 23:00:21 +0530
OK, so we'll agree to not have you mentioned as a translator, and we'll emphasize that when Jagat is involved. There's mentioning, and then there's no mentioning, I know those two. We'll have to devise ways of unmentioning in case the extra emphasis kicks in. Maybe spelling the name backwards with invisible ink and three negative prefixes would do that?
Advaitadas - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 00:43:36 +0530
Sorry for the confusion. I got an idea. On any book edited or translated by Brzezinski, put a sticker with bold capital letters and my pic - ATTENTION! ADVAITADAS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS! laugh.gif
On all other books, just don't mention me................... wink.gif
Mina - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:09:13 +0530
Advaitadas:

What is the problem exactly? Please explain. Do you consider yourself to be more knowledgable than Jagat, or is it some other reason?
Madhava - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:23:22 +0530
It has to do with Advaita's view of Jagadananda's mixed conception of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. According to that, Jagat considers (1) that Rupa Goswami is but a pooping and pissing human being, (2) that one can correct one's guru, (3) that the commentaries of the acharyas are unfortunate, (4) the general scholarly jargon, and something more that escapes me at the moment.

You should be able to find the dialogues of the two somewhere around Gaudiya Discussions. There have been a good many attempts to clear this up, but apparently to no avail. The explanations Jagat has offered to qualify his statements leading to Advaita's (in my view rather extreme) interpretations of what he meant seem to have been unsatisfactory.
Advaitadas - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 18:41:14 +0530
It is sad that most participants here seem to have missed out on those exchanges, they took place here in mid-June 2004. I might just publish them once with fitting refutation, and donate 1000 copies to Rasbihari Lal. I still have the original threads.
DharmaChakra - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:20:36 +0530
QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep 17 2005, 09:11 AM)
It is sad that most participants here seem to have missed out on those exchanges, they took place here in mid-June 2004. I might just publish them once with fitting refutation, and donate 1000 copies to Rasbihari Lal. I still have the original threads.


Well, there are a lot of threads from around June 2004 - can you provide links to the threads in question? Also, many of us may have read them 15 months ago, but our memories have faded.

I do recall there being the implication of some history between the two of you, dating back to the mid-80s that most of us are completely ignorant of. If pertinent to the rift, can you please provide details?

I, like many others, have a hard time understanding how such a dispute between two Vaisnavas we respect can exist without any hope of repair.
Madhava - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:55 +0530
For reference, here are some relevant threads, chronological, ascending order. In the following, the issue is directly mentioned.

* Has this board changed in the last month?
* Secular Vaishnavas, Sacral Mentalities
* Complaints on moderator decisions or behavior

Some more threads where some of the said issues have come up.

* Treating scripture as evidence (I believe it is this one that was called "mother of all apostasies".)
* In response to the thread Shaivate Sadhus and Ganja
* Jagat to Vraja
* Apology
Advaitadas - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 21:53:04 +0530
QUOTE
I do recall there being the implication of some history between the two of you, dating back to the mid-80s that most of us are completely ignorant of. If pertinent to the rift, can you please provide details?


I have quite a few anecdotes in the diaries I kept. Our association wasn't elaborate, we hung out in periods from October 1982 to April 1984. I am packing to go to Vraja, so I am a bit time-pressed, otherwise I would paste some of this in here. Anyway, despite the fact that there were disagreements between us back then, I was Jagat's guest in his flat in Navadvip often, including the last night I was there. So the relationship was cordial enough. I said it before and I say it again, I fell out with Jagat not in the 1980s, but only in June 2004 because of his offensive, challenging and arrogant attitude towards the acaryas and the shastras and his sly way of evading embarrassment during the debate, and simultaneously I fell out with Madhava because of the slavish and blind way he followed Jagat into the abyss of committing 7 out of 10 namaparadhas - satam nindam, guror avagya, shastra ninda, arthavada, harinamni kalpana, namno balad papa buddhi and aham mamadi (though I cant guarantee he doesnt commit the residue 3...)

QUOTE
I, like many others, have a hard time understanding how such a dispute between two Vaisnavas we respect can exist without any hope of repair.


If Jagat sees the light and learns how to behave like a devotee (humble, faithful, submissive) I will not only make up with him, I will respect him as a superior devotee. He is after all far senior to me and I am a man of maryada.
Jagat - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 22:09:15 +0530
I read through a couple of those threads. Lots of really interesting stuff, substance and good writing, with many contributors. Well worthing reading over.
Advaitadas - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 22:21:02 +0530
About the big thread 'treating scripture as evidence (the mother....)', unfortunately I cannot guarantee that what is now available on GD is still the original thread. Two of its moderators are on the defensive there after all. They might have erased incriminating material on it, like Madhava saying he does not agree with his Guru Ananta Das Pandit on the divine status of Rupa Gosvami. Here is what I kept on my harddisk. It is very long (810 kb doc file), so for those who want to see action - start reading from June 17, 2004. (Madhava's disagreement with his Guru had already been edited out when I downloaded this thread unfortunately) Perhaps this should be posted periodically on this board....
Attachment: GD_Treating_scripture_as_evidence.doc
Madhava - Sat, 17 Sep 2005 23:56:22 +0530
QUOTE
They might have erased incriminating material on it, like Madhava saying he does not agree with his Guru Ananta Das Pandit on the divine status of Rupa Gosvami. Here is what I kept on my harddisk. It is very long (810 kb doc file), so for those who want to see action - start reading from June 17, 2004. (Madhava's disagreement with his Guru had already been edited out when I downloaded this thread unfortunately)

I have never said that. The fact that it isn't there even in your copy, in which June 22nd is the last post, speaks for itself. All posts deleted from the board are archived, I do not find such posts in the archives even. If I had full database dumps from as late as from the supposed statement, I would be glad to forward you the full 60 MB database dump to screen through just to prove you wrong.

If there are any differences between your file and the current thread, they are the result of the cleanup operation I did early this year while in Vraja. If you have nothing to prove otherwise with, I suggest you stop making such remarks.

If anyone else has copies of the said thread from any time before June 22nd 2004, please post them here for all to read. If anyone else remembers my saying such a thing, even if you don't have a backup of the statement, please do voice out and let me know.

You also say the same in another post:

QUOTE
Ah, that is why you deleted your post in which I quoted Narottam's 'gaurangere sangi gane nitya siddha kori mane' (yes yes when you and Jagat called Rupa Gosvami a p*** and sh*** human being) and the purport by your Guru Maharaja, to which you replied 'Well then I dont agree with him on that....' wink.gif

You would also be hard pressed to find me saying what you purport that I and Jagat said. Whatever my role in the conversation, I did not say that, so please do not say that I did.

Let's backtrack to this post of yours for more insight on this:

QUOTE
And if his commentary on 'gaurangera sangi gane nitya siddha kori mane' was not wrong because Prof Brzezinski said one of them, namely Rupa Gosvami, was just a shitting and pissing human being on June 19, 2004 with enthusiastic support of Madhava, despite Ananta Das ji writing in his comment that he is a saccidananda vigraha........

Here we are at the point where I agreed with some of Jagadananda's views, and because my guruji said something in his commentary on this song that you thought disagreed with Jagadananda said (even if he didn't say he disagrees), it therefore follows that I must also disagree with my guru, and it therefore follows that since I didn't openly disagree with Jagat, I openly disagreed with my guru. Is that correct?

For reference, here is the post where you present Sri Ananta Das Babaji's comments on the said song. Here is what I said shortly after that to you:

QUOTE(Madhava)
I believe I've made myself sufficiently clear in this regard. If you still wish to misinterpret it, please be my guest, though I will probably not have much further to say.


Here too is one post where you tell me:

QUOTE
Did you ever challenge your Guru on 10.90.42 and his 'errand' statement on Rupa Gosvami being nitya siddha? Did you challenge Narottam on this nitya siddha kori mane, and jay sanatan rup prema bhakti rasa kup?

You can read here my reply to the suggestion. It does not seem that you replied back then.

I also addressed the idea in that very same thread.

You are free to study all my 130 plus posts where Rupa Goswami is mentioned, both before and after the alleged statement, to see whether such a statement would be consistent with what you can read me consistently writing, and then judge for yourself whether it might be possible that you may have misread something I have written, and that might then be the reason for why you cannot seem to find such a statement any longer.

I am now off to take prasad, and will then return to study the database. I can look up the post numbers of each and every post between the beginning of the conversation and the backup thread you posted. The post numbers are stored in an auto_increment field in the database, and deletions will appear as "holes" in the sequence of numbers in the current database. I will post my results shortly. You are free to verify it against any of the twenty plus full database dumps I have stored from between November 2004 and today. I may have older versions somewhere on backup CDs if you are interested.
Madhava - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 01:52:29 +0530
As for the post numbers in the database surrounding the controversy.

The post where Advaitadas posted the commentary is #18077. That is followed by Jagadananda's post #18078, then you as #18079 and me as #18080. Jagat #18081, Rasamrita #18082, Jagat #18083, Advaitadas #18084, #18085. Then Madhava #18086 in another thread, and again Madhava #18087 in this thread, Jagat #18088. Hari Sarana 18089 in another thread, Rasamrita #18090 back to the thread at hand, followed by Advaitadas #18091, #18092.

It should have been one of those. I can go on noting these down if you suspect it's been further somewhere to show the lack of missing entries in the database in the time under question. Just give me the word and I'll do that for you.

Now, you can of course say I've edited the post afterwards and modified all posts where may have been quoted as well, or that I went ahead and changed the numbering of the posts in the database. That is certainly your prerogative.
DharmaChakra - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 04:21:56 +0530
QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep 16 2005, 03:13 PM)
Sorry for the confusion. I got an idea. On any book edited or translated by Brzezinski, put a sticker with bold capital letters and my pic - ATTENTION! ADVAITADAS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS!† laugh.gif
On all other books, just don't mention me...................† wink.gif


Advaitadas-ji:
I'm going to carefully ask this question, then remove myself from the conversation for fear of having a vested interest.

Is there any situation wherein you would allow Jagat to edit your works? If yes, what would he have to do to make this possible? If not, then just say that it's an impossiblity & I'll just accept it as the way it must be.

Advaitadas - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 15:40:33 +0530
QUOTE
Now, you can of course say I've edited the post afterwards and modified all posts where may have been quoted as well, or that I went ahead and changed the numbering of the posts in the database. That is certainly your prerogative.



I can only speculate about what happened to your post. I am not a great technician like you so you may easily be able to pull the wool over my eyes. I do have a photographic memory though, without needing any hi tech aid, and you did say that you did not agree with Ananta das Babaji about the nitya siddha status of Srila Rupa Goswamipad. My backups stopped at June 22, 2004 but I backed this entire thread up long after that, so that does not prove anything. Besides, with Print File one sometimes fails to get a backup of the whole file anyway. Most likely no other member has made a backup back then, as you see most people havent even noticed the whole debate at all. Furthermore, most of the current participants of this forum joined after June 2004. I understand that my preaching undermines Jan's very 'raison d'etre' as a professional speculator and thus he will never concede. For you, I suppose your prestige as a world preacher and an important sisya of ADP is in the way between you and me and the naked truth... satyam eva vijayate nAnrtam.
Advaitadas - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 15:51:03 +0530
QUOTE
Is there any situation wherein you would allow Jagat to edit your works? If yes, what would he have to do to make this possible? If not, then just say that it's an impossiblity & I'll just accept it as the way it must be.


Dear Dharmachakraji,
There is something more to it than this. If I were a sisya of Ananta dasji Maharaja, Jagat and Madhava would be in really big trouble. Fortunately for them, I am not, and I had already decided anyway to withdraw my name as a translator from ADP's books back in March 2003, for reasons of personal guru nistha. This is not a rejection of ADP of any sort but just a correction of my own Guru nishtha. So my name goes off anyway, with or without Brzezinski. If I had been a sisya of ADP, then the following would apply:

QUOTE
advaitadas: If Jagat sees the light and learns how to behave like a devotee (humble, faithful, submissive) I will not only make up with him, I will respect him as a superior devotee. He is after all far senior to me and I am a man of maryada.

Advaitadas - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 15:59:03 +0530
QUOTE
Madhava: You may or may not be aware of the fact that both of us are daily engaged in yogapitha-upasana as a part of our daily sadhana, and I trust you know that the said practice involves meditation on the nitya-svarupas of these parshadas of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.


I wasnt aware that Jagat was doing this, no, but it doesnt matter. See it as a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde syndrome, there is Jagat the bhakta (of sorts) and Dr. J.K. Brzezinski PhD the egghead. So the former is doing the Yogpith and the latter blasphemes the hell out of Rupa Gosvamipada. Somehow they dwell in the same body..........

Dont ask me how this works, though..... blink.gif

PS I do get the impression that Jan is trying to pull down Rupa Gosvami to pull down his authority with it, so that he can establish his own authority ('opinion') as equal or even superior to Rupa Gosvami's. Its just a creepy feeling, I hope I'm wrong and dont quote me on it OK? Food for thought......
Madhava - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:04:12 +0530
QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep 18 2005, 11:10 AM)
I can only speculate about what happened to your post. I am not a great technician like you so you may easily be able to pull the wool over my eyes.

I must then be a liar. And a confident liar at that, as I'm calling for anyone to come forward with a copy of the said statement at any time.

Do you think I do not know what I have said and would say? Do you think I would not remember if I would have expressed my disagreement over a doctrinal issue with my guru in a public forum?


QUOTE
I do have a photographic memory though, without needing any hi tech aid, and you did say that you did not agree with Ananta das Babaji about the nitya siddha status of Srila Rupa Goswamipad.

If you indeed do have photographic memory, I trust you'll then please tell me the exact words I said and give me the date of the post of which you took the memory photo. Otherwise, please take your memory camera for repairs.

You may have impressions on what was said, I do not challenge that. Please do realize that hasty reading can lead to wrong impressions. This is the most plausible reason for why you cannot find the post of mine you are talking about even in your backup.


QUOTE
My backups stopped at June 22, 2004 but I backed this entire thread up long after that, so that does not prove anything. Besides, with Print File one sometimes fails to get a backup of the whole file anyway.

You can very clearly see that your copy of the thread extends far beyond the part where this commentary was posted. I already took the trouble to demonstrate that no posts have been deleted in the vicinity of that comment. You do not see anyone reacting to such a statement anywhere in the thread, nor indeed anywhere else in the forums. One would imagine such a statement would have been deep imprinted in the minds of anyone and everyone who participated in the said discussion.


QUOTE
Most likely no other member has made a backup back then, as you see most people havent even noticed the whole debate at all. Furthermore, most of the current participants of this forum joined after June 2004.

Participants in that thread who are currently around are: Madhava, dauji, vamsidas, Jagat, Madanmohan das, Advaitadas, nabadip, adiyen, braja, Audarya-lila dasa, Elpis, Hari Saran, Rasaraja dasa, Madan Gopal, Malatilata, Anand, Bhrigu and jiva.

That's a total of 18 individuals. I'm calling for all of them to please say a word if they can remember my saying anything to that extent in that thread, or in any other thread for that matter. Please come forward and say freely whatever your impression is.
vamsidas - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:27:57 +0530
I wonder whether the following post caused some confusion:

http://www.gaudiyadiscussions.com/index.ph...indpost&p=30566

In it, Madhava wrote:

QUOTE
Yes, and now I am certainly contradicting my guru here, of course I also think that Rupa Goswami is an ordinary human being, and in that I am enthusiastically supporting Jagadananda (your Jan), as he certainly spends his days working with texts written by ordinary human beings on the basis of a bunch of old books.


Where Madhava surely intended sarcasm, a literal reading of this passage could easily cause confusion or offense.
Madhava - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:53:32 +0530
Thank you for the perceptive pick. That is in a different thread, from January 5th, though touching on the same theme. Sarcasm was indeed intended, I do not know how much more clear I could have made it.
Jagat - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 18:39:21 +0530
These periodic returns of Advaita to remind everyone of my "errand ways" would probably not be allowed to remain on the forum if it was not for Advaita's senior status. After all, there is nothing new in what he says. Those old threads says it all, amply. The deliberate insults to me were discussed there (Check the old threads, I guess a search for Brzezinski will do the trick, as the only one who uses that name is he.)

Anyway, I have a post that I will make later today on another thread and then I will give Advaita the floor. My participation here is a guilty pleasure that takes away from more important tasks, like making a living. I will recuse myself as moderator and participant and let him show his stuff freely, without fear of apostates like myself interrupting his pure and scriptural train of thought.
Madhava - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 18:55:04 +0530
If I were put in a position where I had to plead for one or the other to stay around, that would not be a choice at all. Advaitadas left the forums for a month and a half in the end of June, presumably over disagreements on the way the forums were being managed, only to return a month ago. Since the comeback, we do not find a single post on anything else but PC help and the likes of what you read in this thread.

On the other hand, if you look at what we find from Jagadananda, even if you avoid the writings where the text is unbearably sophisticated and thereby annoying, you'll find a ton of inspirational verses, helpful practical, philosophical and linguistic notes, and so forth.

Let us call an end to this right here and right now. If Advaitadas has something further to say concerning Jagadananda as a person, he is free to do that over private channels. Since he has repeatedly proven himself unable to resolve the said philosophical matters without the accompaniment of personal judgement, there is little good any of this will yield. This thread is therefore the last of its kind as far as I am concerned.

Jagadananda, if you feel you need to once again withdraw from more active participation from the forums in the face of more pressing tasks in life, please know that we would always welcome it if you shared some of the materials off your scratchboard even if you can't find the time for active participation.

I had myself rather enjoyed the ongoing discussions in the forums before this thread started, apparently out of the blue. In hindsight, I have to wonder why Advaitadas posted this at all, if not to make a remark on Jagadananda, as he was fully aware that we had agreed to not publish his name as the translator long ago, whatever the case with Jagadananda or without.
Rasaraja dasa - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 20:41:16 +0530
Radhe Radhe!

I imagine that what Vamsidas has found must be what Advaita was referring to because otherwise I was at a loss. I think it was very heavy handed to accuse Madhava of doing anything so crooked but to each his own I guess.

In terms of the whole basis of argument in the "treating scriptures as evidence" thread... I personally agree with Advaita in terms o faith and where one draws the line regarding the ability to comprehend:

QUOTE
"You dont believe/accept that Ugrasena had billions of bodyguards but you will accept that Krishna danced with the gopis for a night of Brahma and He lifted Mount Govardhana? You will or wont accept that billions of universes bubble from the pores of His skin?" Where do you draw the line and on what criteria? kham mano buddhir eva ca, bhinnna prakritir ashtada (Gita 7.4) 'The mind and intelligence are My separated, material energies' , while 'Yogamayam upashrita (SB 10.29.1)' Krishna danced the Rasa by taking shelter of Yogamaya, the divine illusion. So Yogamaya can create a Rasa Mandal for a night of Brahma and not a billion bodyguards for Ugrasena? Again, where do you draw the line, and with what?"


At one point, in PM, Advaita pointedly asked me if I agreed then why didnít I say anything? It was rather simple really; by the time he had made that point and I had read it the conversations were really out of control in terms of name calling so I just decided it wasnít worth chirping in. Instead I did dropped Jagat a PM regarding my thoughts and especially why I thought it took such a turn due to his own wording and I was a bit surprised by what I thought he was saying.

Moving forward I think these exchanges need to happen in private because this is really a messÖ and I think, at this point, it isnít about what people say or believe but what others have decided the other has said or believes.

Rasaraja dasa
braja - Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:38:16 +0530
QUOTE(Rasaraja dasa @ Sep 18 2005, 11:11 AM)
Moving forward I think these exchanges need to happen in private because this is really a messÖ and I think, at this point, it isnít about what people say or believe but what others have decided the other has said or believes.


Yes, this is a good point. Actually I don't even think there is much that is worth analysing in terms of the original points of contention. If we were to summarize that I think we'd all agree that:

a. Advaita has a literal outlook on matters of sastra

b. Jagat has raised an outlook that is more common to many of us westerners

c. Madhava didn't declare himself as opposed to the views of his guru

Beyond that, it is also clear that Advaita's campaign seems to be about more than that particular thread. Any attentive reader would have noted his history of disdain for Jagat, which, by the time some members were trying to help Jagat get to Vraja, reached truly ugly proportions. Unfortunately only Advaita himself can address that part of his personality, but hiding the actual issue behind the screen of the original thread won't help.

Advaita, despite your painting Jagat and Madhava as great aparadhis, it is you who has lost out, it is you who has withheld from sharing and educating others, it is you who has stewed away over this for way too long. If there isn't some deep-rooted issue at stake, but simply a difference of opinion, then surely it's time for you to move on. Otherwise, what can you hope to gain? Revenge? Ick.

I have to also question the way you have painted your attack on Jagat as a doctrinal matter when I see that you cooperate with Nitai, whose opinions are surely even more extreme and "blasphemous" and you have participated at another forum whose principle members have discounted Gaudiya siddhanta, called manjari bhava voyeurism, the works of Kavirajapada "inauthentic" and so on--and yet you don't raise any issues there. That you recently revealed that you also participate in ISKCON programs also bamboozled me, till I now look and see a pattern. You somehow seem comfortable being a black sheep. You can be amongst others who are dissimilar to you more easily than you can be amongst those with whom you are more naturally aligned. I don't know what to make of that. Competitiveness? Envy? Insecurity? Acceptance issues?

In seeing your sentiment for your mother, the wonderful collection of anecdotes concerning your gurudeva and other Vaisnavas that you have shared, and the occasional humorous or personal exchanges at GD, I know there is a side of your personality that is much more beautiful than the side that you have again shown here.

Perhaps I have been too personal here but I don't know what else to say. It seems there is no point any of us wasting time on this topic at the literal level (ironic as that is). Ultimately it is sad for all of us. I do see a way forward but it's not at the level of "In post #999998 he said...then in post #999999 he argued..." It would take some truly brave souls to step forward from this muck into a more open-hearted sanga, the kind suggested by our very own divine Sri Rupa...who may or may not have defecated.
Kamala - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 01:54:17 +0530
from another thread entirely: "...it was a fairly difficult period with a lot of in-fighting and jostling for superiority, fault-finding and so on." (intended tone = ironic/wry/cautiously optimistic).
Hari Saran - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 05:47:36 +0530
I think GD needs a general philological coaching; GD could actually be an excellent place for exploring the thoughtful Vaishnava World, instead it is becoming more and more evident that --according to my understanding and vision-- GDís community appears to be far from it is real purpose, which is to promote love, respect, appreciation and mellowness.

Is there any hope?
Gaurasundara - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 07:11:24 +0530
First of all, I'd like to be forgiven for wading in (butting in) with this issue but I truly believe that I have some valuable points to make. If anyone disagrees, please feel free to and correct me. I'd like to say that I was not around the boards at the time when this debate (argument) took place, as I was off on my six-month trip of doubt and disillusionment, but I was informed about it by Advaitaji in private during that time. I think it would be fair to say that Advaita and I share a great friendship and we used to talk often via messenger, at times we discuss events in our personal lives, topics of siddhanta and of course some things taking place on GD. But ususally I have some questions and he answers them. smile.gif

I can say that without a doubt, Advaita is one of my greatest Vaishnava friends and I am dumbstruck in total admiration for his spiritual strength, complete nistha in Gaudiya-upasana and also his guru-nistha. I do not want to reveal too much about him without his permission, but we have discussed events that have taken place in his life that speak to me of his total and utter obedience to Guru and Gauranga. He truly does not let any awkward material situation get in the way of his bhajan and as far as possible he tries to tweak such situations so that he will not have to compromise his spiritual principles. Such things leave me full of admiration and leave me wishing that it may be possible for me to do similar things one day. It is my very great honour to have met such a devotee who actually practices what he preaches.
I do not know Jagat on such a personal level save a few casual exchanges and a compliment when he posts something thoughtful, but I do respect his erudition and obvious learning that is exhibited so well in much of his writing.

Having observed the several occasions on which this issue has come up (barring the original due to my absence), I must say that I read such exchanges and immediately felt a pang of sadness that two great devotees could have such a long-running disagreement over a fundamental issue, other historical issues notwithstanding. As this topic has once again reared its ugly head, I feel the same pangs of sadness welling up and briming over, and wondering how this episode will be concluded.

Thanks to Madhava, I was able to re-familiarise myself with the threads involved, and I found a statement by Advaita that I think is key to understanding his point of view:

QUOTE(Advaita)
How I miss the simple faith of the Indian sometimes.......

To me it seems very much like the political struggle in the USA between the Conservatives and the Liberals. Here at GD, Advaita is the archetypal Conservative and Jagat the archetypal Liberal. As such, it seems that it is only natural that they are destined to butt heads together. And a lot of headbutting takes place on GD anyway, so the problem lies in personal remarks. Jagat would be understandably upset since the remarks against him are so personal in nature.

But I agree that this has gone on long enough with unfair accusations and so on. I must say that I see this as very much of a counterculture issue; Advaita has truly absorbed "Bengali" and spiritual culture and now epitomises it. It is often the case that Vaishnava faith and culture are inextricably intertwines and it is extremely hard to distinguish between the two sometimes. I do not like to make this material consideration but I genuinely feel that Advaita is someone who who would make any Bengali Vaishnava proud. In my view, he speaks exactly as a faithful and reverent Indian Vaishnava would do, with proper reference to shastra and all. Note that I am referring more to the siddhanta he presents rather than the trenchant way of expression. I assume that he is hurt to see that other Gaudiyas who pledge allegiance to Mahaprabhu are not on the same page in his view, and this probably accounts for the strong writings we sometimes see from him. It is the "simple faith of the Indian" that I think is the object of disagreement here, as this concept has been mildly referred to in those older threads.

On the other hand, Jagat contrasts this nicely with his philosophical mind, Western philosophy I might say since he references them often. Obviously he spends a lot of time thinking and analysing the various dynamics in the scriptures and how to present them to like-minded people of this age. I also liked the 1971 picture that Jagat posted of himself in one of the threads. smile.gif

There are people who will appreciate the presentations of both, one or the other, or even neither. I think that ultimately it all depends on what one feels most comfortable presenting in the direct presence of Guru and Gauranga. "Do you think this post is pleasing to Guru and Gauranga?" is a question that every poster must ask themselves and hold themselves up to such a standard, which is not at all lofty.

I must say that I think it is highly unfair to judge Advaita on his standard of recent postings; while it is true that his postings have considerably reduced to computing queries due to this feud is it not at all possible to take into account his entire history of posting which are replete with shastric references and much discussion to chew over? I also think it is unfair to suggest that he should be removed from this board but for his seniority, I think this is the second time that this has been said. To me it seems like very much of a low blow. And also things in his private life. Aside from all of the personal remarks, I don't think that Advaita should be taken to task for a supposedly "fundamentalist" attitude; he is quoting shastra in all of his arguments after all, and his considerations as far as I can see are based on divine considerations.

As far as I am concerned, personally, there is something very very wrong in the view that Sri Rupa Gosvami was a mortal. For all the guff and accusations about having an ISKCON mentality (as apparent in past threads), it seems that the one thing that was emphasised in ISKCON was the humanlike nature of these beings and this is a very important element that I believe sadhakas should retain as a core part of their outlook so as to prevent offenses from happening.

I notice that elsewhere the subject of Jagat's views on "Kheturi" has come up. Shall we not remember the unifying force of the original Kheturi festival, where differing factions of the new Gaudiya religion discussed their conceptions, agreed on some common siddhanta, and went off to happily go their own ways? Why can we not have that here on GD? Why can't Jagat and Advaita put all this mess behind them, agree to disagree and move on? I would be extremely saddened to see Advaita go and I hope that it never happens. Advaita is a valuable resource of knowledge and personality whose posting history shows him to be a great asset in discussions. We are all in this together so we will all have to learn to live and work with one another, and help each other.

I am glad at least that this issue has once again arisen in a subdivision of Srivas Angan, behind the scenes so to speak. How embarrassing it would be for this to spill 'outside' yet again?

I have no idea if I have communicated my views properly, as they don't seem to reflect very well when I view my own words. Hopefully everyone else will be able to understand what I am saying and feel my anguish over this whole affair.
Hari Saran - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 09:12:20 +0530
I would like to add that I do not recall reading/understanding that Madhavananda Das in any way has challenged the teachings of his Gurudeva. He may tried to understand his Guruís teachings and took a rather dry approaching, however, by following his conjectures in that way, I do not believe he had any bad intention.
Advaitadas - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 10:54:23 +0530
QUOTE
Jagat: These periodic returns of Advaita to remind everyone of my "errand ways" would probably not be allowed to remain on the forum ...


This is the perfection of dictatorship. And coming from a 'liberal' .......
Madhava - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 12:11:08 +0530
Advaitadas, would you be so kind and address what you accused me of saying? Since the post and my PMs to all concerned, I have received several replies, none of which suggest that I would have said anything to that extent.

Rest assured you will be banned if it turns out you are trying to deliberately tarnish the reputation of others by means of misinformation and are disinterested in following up on the clarification of the said issue.

What Jagadananda says is true. If it were anyone else but you (or possibly someone other as senior as your good self, such as perhaps Minaketan) who had posted all the personal attacks and hateful posts about Jagat and a good many others you disagreed on, he would have been banned ages ago.
Advaitadas - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 12:50:03 +0530
Madhava, I do not deliberately tarnish your reputation (I can't help wondering though, would anyone be threatened with a ban if others than you or your friends' reputation would be deliberately tarnished?) At one point in the debate you said 'Well then I do not agree with him (ADP).' I cannot prove it, so the defendant may be released due to lack of evidence, the prosecution rests it case.

Gee whiz, I only wanted to remind you that I dont want my name on the books, OK? blink.gif
Kamala - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:06:20 +0530
QUOTE(Gaurasundara @ Sep 19 2005, 02:41 AM)
I also liked the 1971 picture that Jagat posted of himself in one of the threads. smile.gif


Just for the sake of accuracy, my recollection is that I posted this picture (not Jagat himself). Yes, I like the picture too, I found it inspiring - which in the final analysis, is what counts for me.

I don't have sufficient experience on this board to get involved in this debate. But I do know that when Jagat is not around and posting, my own enthusiasm for hearing, reading and general sadhana wanes considerably, to the point of complete absence.

Kamala
Hari Saran - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 13:26:33 +0530
I think this is a good time to look for the qualities of both Jagat and Advaita, at one point they both played positively influential on the audience of this forum and on others out there... Therefore, Advaita is great, Jagat is great, Mina is great, Nitai is great Madhava is great, Braja and many others are, too.

What about raise the hands to chant and dance.... biggrin.gif
vamsidas - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:43:30 +0530
never mind
DharmaChakra - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:45:21 +0530
Everyone:
Well, I just woke up & remembered that I have some small mod rights in this section, and so like anyone with a little power, I want to exercise it as much as I possibly can.

I don't think this issue is going to be resolved here in this thread, and in fact I think the situation is degenerating at an alarming rate. I'm going to give everyone a few hours to either wrap up what they have to say, plead with me to keep the thread open, or PM me to tell me what a dictator I am, etc. biggrin.gif

I just feel this thread is heading in a direction where someone is going to get backed into a corner & bad stuff will start happening. Why make this rift grow any deeper or involve more devotees?

So, a few hours until I get to work to wrap it all up, or a Mod can move this thread to a different location.
Madhava - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 16:46:47 +0530
QUOTE(Advaitadas @ Sep 19 2005, 08:20 AM)
Madhava, I do not deliberately tarnish your reputation (I can't help wondering though, would anyone be threatened with a ban if others than you or your friends' reputation would be deliberately tarnished?) At one point in the debate you said 'Well then I do not agree with him (ADP).'† I cannot prove it, so the defendant may be released due to lack of evidence, the prosecution rests it case.

You cannot prove it, and you have been provided ample options for what may possibly have led you to the mistaken impression, including a link to a post you may have misread. You have been given a number of explanations on why your account is probably mistaken, even if by accident. Why do you then, even if no-one else recalls anything of the sort, want to persistently assume the worst? If I say I did not say that, why can you not take my word for it? Just because I do not disagree with Egghead Brzezinski (my Jagadananda), all evils of the world are in me, and my character is gone for good? Does it follow that if I have theological disagreements with you, I am automatically suspect for being a liar?


QUOTE
(I can't help wondering though, would anyone be threatened with a ban if others than you or your friends' reputation would be deliberately tarnished?)

A number of member accounts have been removed or made moderated on account of unbefitting behavior. Your case has been on extended time for a long, long time, and people have at times wondered why we allow you to post as you do.


QUOTE
Gee whiz, I only wanted to remind you that I dont want my name on the books, OK?† blink.gif

You might have best accomplished that by sending me an e-mail and PM where you would say that you'd like to remind me that you don't want your name on the books. You could also have had the courtesy of referring to Jagadananda with his devotional name, which is the one I believe he would like to have used, instead of consistently referring to him as "Brzezinski" or "Jan", is it not?
Jagat - Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:00:34 +0530
Thanks Gaurasundara. I also appreciate Advaita's contribution. If anyone has the patience to look through the records, especially on the threads to which links were given, they will see that I have consistently been respectful and apprreciative of Advaita Das. My only disappointment has been with his abrupt and condescending manner. If this is "traditional Bengali," well then, it is not the culture that I know.

I am really at a loss about what to do. His refusing to use my Guru-given name or my GD alias, but rather my worldly identity, is a deliberate comment on who and what I am. His refusal to accept an apology, which has been tended many times, along with an explanation for why I made the comments I did, are only attributable to some hidden reason that Advaita will not divulge or is personally unaware of.

I suspect, and believe me I say this with all humility, that Advaita does not like it that someone like myself can come along and find errors in his translations. This is natural and quite understandable, but surely it is childish to react in this manner.

As to our so-called "philosophical differences," you are quite right that this is a C/L divide. However, you will note that I am only active on this forum and no other, which is a sign of my exclusive commitment to Gaudiya Vaishnavism and its goals of prema bhakti and service to the lotus feet of Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Srimati Radharani. This is why I find that posts of the type that Advaita makes toward me are an insult to my spiritual commitments and therefore to those of everyone on this forum. We may understand things differently, we may come equipped for the task differently, but if we bow down to the same lotus feet we should surely have some respect for one another.

People say they cannnot understand how two senior devotees could engage in a petty quarrel of this type. Please reread all the material that has been written objectively and you will see that I have done everything I can to appease Advaitaji, and that other forum moderators have attempted again and again to find some way to reason with him, but that his animosity towards me has remained adamantine.

If I say that the kinds of comments he makes would be unacceptable if written by anyone but him, he accuses me of abuse of power. I have not exercised or abused my powers as a moderator with Advaita, nor has anyone else. I am at a loss, as I am completely distressed to see that Advaita could be so mean-spirited and petty. In fact, I think that we would be doing him a service by deleting some of his posts, as by leaving them for all to see, they only serve to diminish his stature in the eyes of many who have thought highly of him.
But as I said in my last post, I have spent a little too much time of late posting here. In fact, I often find that when I am under stress, I get creative in unexpected directions. Though I will reduce participation for the next little while, I will heed Madhava's call to contribute any gems I find in the ocean of nectar where I am obliged to swim.

In the meantime, I throw down the gauntlet to Advaita,

"Come on, Advaitaji, show us your real stuff. If you are diviing deep in the ocean of nectar, as your friends and followers seem to think you are, then come up with something that the hungry ears of the sadhus who visit Gaudiya Discussions can feed on. Stop giving us vinegar. When you do, you only reveal the poverty of your own spirit."