Perfection In Guru Tattva -

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

About 7 years ago, after I stopped playing and traveling with 108 and was simply running programs at 26 Second Avenue, I was invited to join a GBC Committee to look at the Ritvik arguments. Early in my devotional life I was exposed to various elements of the ritvik train of thought and had become quite good at silencing those who pushed that doctrine. Word had gotten out that I was looking at work on the ritvik doctrine being put together by Swami B.V. Tripurari and Swami B. G. Narasingha Maharaja’s group to give suggestions, from an ISKCON point of view, on the request of BB Vishnu Maharaja. So the members of the Ritvik committee figured I would be a good addition to their team.

When I started having initial exchanges with some members of this committee, some of which were GBC Member’s and ISKCON Guru’s, I started to become deeply disturbed by their viewpoint and, in my opinion, dogmatic acceptance on the “perfection” of Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja.

In my own heart I did, and still do, believe that the perfection of Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja is that he gave his heart, mind and soul to the service of his Guru and Mahaprabhu. My understanding of Guru Tattva and, in particular spiritual perfection, are obviously not aligned with the Webster dictionaries definition of perfection. My understanding of Vaisnava perfection is built upon what drives ones heart and the very essence of their being where the dictionary looks at perfection to be 100% without fault. So when I encountered statements by Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja that were incorrect or even, in my mind, offensive I could accept that Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja could be mistaken, yet still perfect in a Vaisnava sense.

I always found myself disturbed by certain statements of Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja especially in regards to subjects such as women, culture/race, sexuality and other such “worldly” topics. After examining all of what I could on Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja I felt that these issues were more of a result of Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja’s British education and the social climate of his time and not necessarily from a Vaisnava philosophical standpoint. So when I would take those statements as what they were; incorrect statements that were a result of his education and social climate I felt a bit more comfortable. I don’t believe that such aspects of his life and being makes him an “imperfect” Vaisnava; just a miseducated or imperfect individual. Again if the Vaisnava conception of perfection of Guru is focused on the intent, heart and focus on service to Guru and Mahaprabhu than this aspect of Srila Bhaktivedanata Maharaja has a different context than if perfection is simply defined as correct in every way.

The understanding of perfection in Guru Tattva has never seemed to me to be defined in a way that perfection is based on a perspective Guru's mathematical skills, cultural understanding, or managerial skills/philosophies as perfect.

At the same time I am not suprised that many within ISKCON take Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja's every statement as 100% perfect and unquestionable as he didn’t seem to identify which aspects of his words were based on pure siddhanta as opposed to his material education. Most importantly Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja didn’t seem to understand, or in my opinion put enough of a focus on the effect that his words and, at times, his ability to not speak or do something had on his disciples. For example his comments on the size of a woman’s brain and African people are the result of his British education and the social climate he grew up in as opposed the Bhagavatama. How Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja approached the obvious faults of his institution and failed to take the necessary, and sometimes painful, steps to rectify such problems (i.e. Gurukula abuse, etc) are a result of his imperfect managerial skills.

As a leader it is of the utmost importance to be extremely sensitive. What you say, or fail to say. will go a long way in molding the behavior and mindset of those you are responsible for and that seek your leadership and advice. In essence, especially in the realm of Guru-Disciple relationship, they will live by your words. The importance of having that self censor/editor is critical in a leader. On a small scale I see this very important reality in my work as a District Manager. The things that I say or choose not to say have a tremendous effect on the approach of my team so I need to think a lot about not just what to say but how to say it. Every word I write or speak to them at visits molds the direction and focus of the 220 individuals that work for me so I need to make sure that what I say, I mean. So in this regard I feel there is some “fault” in Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja. By putting fault in quotes I am not trying to minimize how disturbing some of his comments or viewpoints were or are to me but differentaite what I perceive to be material faults verse spiritual faults.

This is where I really ran into trouble with the devotees from this committee. Many of these devotees clearly stated that whatever Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja did or said was 100% perfect in every respect. I simply couldn’t buy that and it led me to depart from my service and distance myself from the ISKCON institution.

In some respects this is what led me to this forum as I find the majority of the philosophy of Vaisnavism to be beautiful, inspiring and having captured my heart. However, that couldn’t overcome my differences with ISKCON/GM approach and particulars. My hope was to learn of a perspective and outlook that is base on a different approach to the same philosophy, principles and understandings.

Now I know some will label me an offender for my words and I beg your forgiveness as I am not trying to find fault with Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja. I am just trying to share my thoughts. I will always have Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja in my heart as I do believe their focus was on their intent, heart and focus on service to Guru and Mahaprabhu. I do not have any platform to judge Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja so I give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t question their purity or “perfection”; I just think there is a natural limit to how much I accept and embrace their viewpoint and words.

That’s enough of a ramble for now as my son is ready to get out of the tub and get to bed. I hope that Madhava, Jagat and the esteemed Vaisnavas on this board will forgive any offense I may have inadvertently made and that they could further enlighten me on the different aspects, viewpoints and approaches that some of the different traditional lines take on this critical aspect of Guru tattva.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vainsvas,
Rasaraja dasa

Dandavats. All glories to THE vAISNAVAS.

Does anyone have feedback on this topic? I am not really looking for a take on Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja rather I used him as an example where perfection in Guru Tattva seems to take on a different light and gravity then I believe the Gaudiya siddhanta has presented.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated as this is a point i have questioned and struggled to understand over the last 15 years.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I recall reading in Ananta Das Baba's book, Guru Tattva Vijnana, that the mercy of Guru is in the form of bhajan that is bestowed on the disciple. It is the Guru who gives entrance to a sadhaka into the the path of sadhana bhakti. Sandhana bhakti is one of the stages included within the appearance of bhakti upon the jiva. Sadhana bhakti qualifies one for bhava, and after bhava appears and intensifies then prema manifests within the heart. Therefore Sri Narottama Das Thakur prays

sri guru carana padma, kevala bhakati sadma

The lotus feet of Sri Guru are the way to attain pure bhakti.

Pure bhakti is only attainable through the Lord's devotees coming in a channel of disciplic succession. When one obtains the good fortune of their holy association then can achieve the highest fulfilment in human life by their mercy.

When a jiva has faith in the teachings of bhakti he endevours to associate with saints. The culmination of that association is to take shelter of one devotee as his initiating Guru and take the sacred mantras from him, as well as learn about the process of devotion.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

So it would appear that you, and subsequently Sri Anata das Babaji, are saying that perfection is routed in the link to disciplic succession and the Guru’s heart, mind and words being focused on bhajan and service to aspiring Vaisnava by giving shelter of the disciplic succession and instruction on that particulars disciples ability to practice bhajan. Is that correct?

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

A disciple should meditate on his Guru as a sadhaka devoted to the lotus feet of Sri Gauranga Mahaprabhu and His associates and a manjari maidservant devoted to the lotus feet of Sri Radha and Her associates.

To meditate on the latter one would need the Guru to reveal siddha pranali, which includes the ekadash bhava of the Guru himself ie. her name, complexion, seva, age, etc.

As far as I can see, the principal part of Guru Tattva is (1) the light of bhakti that shines through him, and (2) the vision of the possibility of human perfection.

The Diksha Guru is the one who solidifies this vision and establishes the means for attaining that perfection. By entering into the agreement of initiation with the guru, you establish a specific identity (sambandha-visesa-jnanam) with the Divine that is to be the polar star around which your spiritual life will develop. If your samskara actually takes place, i.e., if the process of initiation has the desired effect on the subtle body, then this relation will remain embedded in your very being, even if you do little else. Of course, taking up the sadhana, etc., deepens and confirms that relationship.

The insistence that the spiritual master be physically or mentally perfect is related to the offense of finding imperfections in the guru. The guru is perfect because of the light that shone through him or her and, if you are lucky, continues to shine. But even if that light seems to not shine in the specific manifestation of guru tattva that you have known, and you feel obliged to move on, you must always bow down to the fact of its once having shone. Such epiphanies are rare and even a cheater reveals to you something genuine about yourself.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I would like to thank everyone for their quick and substantial feedback on my questions. Although my previous and current understanding is not as refined and advanced as what has been mentioned:

"A disciple should meditate on his Guru as a sadhaka devoted to the lotus feet of Sri Gauranga Mahaprabhu and His associates and a manjari maidservant devoted to the lotus feet of Sri Radha and Her associates.

To meditate on the latter one would need the Guru to reveal siddha pranali, which includes the ekadash bhava of the Guru himself ie. her name, complexion, seva, age, etc."

A disciple of Sri Ananta dasa Babaji, Prangovinda das, has just sent me several books and cd’s and I hope the book mentioned, Guru Tattva Vijnana, is one of them as it sounds very interesting.

It does seem that the initial feedback on this topic focuses on the perfection question as being more based on aspects outside of the western perspective on perfection. This is comforting to me . So I look forward to further feedback.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Would you care to elaborate on the concept of human perfection?

I think we need to draw a clear line between the perfection in spiritual wisdom expected of the guru, and perfection in the various other fields of life, including history and practical affairs.

I think you have brought this up in a very pictoresque manner in the debate surrounding Prabodhananda and the statements of Bhaktivinoda and Bhaktisiddhanta, reasoning that their verdict might have been different, should they have had more resource material from which to draw conclusions.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I believe this question is for me so here goes:

In my opinion there is no such thing as human perfection. Sort an oxymoron in that human, in this context, is defined as with fault and specific characteristics and perfection is an absolute.

I would ascertain that perfection of spiritual wisdom would be in understanding and executing the essence of spiritual truth. One can be in such a position while still having faults in certain respects. This is especially relevant when confronting statements by the acaryas which may to some degree address cultural, social or historical context because in that particular regard on can only know what has been made available to them so if what is given is imperfect than what can be expected? So in this regards I don’t know that more resources would prevent such a quandary because it is still more reliant on the specific resource then the number of resources. Does that make sense?

There is also the aspect of social/cultural influence has in how one may present a particular angle. For example I believe that Bhaktivinoda’s writing and presentation was very much influenced by the social and cultural climate of his time. His writings definitely contain influence from the religious presentation and angles of popular western religion and British thought at that particular time. The influence may have been more prevalent in the language and presentation as opposed to the essence but its influence is rather evident in my opinion. I don't think the influence in and of itself is a bad thing and I don't think it is something that could ever be avoided. However this then becomes further accented by western followers of these individuals. When we go the step further to only contain one within the presentation or books of one particualr writer and isolate them from the writings and presentations of the previous/other acaryas then we further compound this influence.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

This is the SCS Math translation
krpa-sindhum su-sampurnam
sarva-sattvopakarakam
nisprham sarvatam siddham
sarva-vidya-visaradam
sarva-samsaya-samchetta
'nalaso gurur amrtah

The Hari-bhakti-vilasa gives the following definition of a guru:
One who is an ocean of mercy, who is fulfilled in all respects, who is possessed of all good qualities, who always works for the benefit of all souls, who is free from lust, who is perfect in all respects, who is well-versed in the scriptures and who knows the science of Krsna, who can remove all the doubts of his disciples, and who is always alert in the service of Krsna is to be known as a guru.
(Hari-Bhakti-Vilasa 1.45,46 quoted from Visnu-smrti vacana )

Sometime ago my GBC told me that in this Kali Yuga Bhaktivedanta Swami's purports have greater importance than the verse it relates to! Before embarking on his journey to the west he wrote in the preface to Srimad Bhagavatam,
" I must admit my frailties in presenting Srimad Bhagavatam, but still I am hopeful of it's good reception by the thinkers and leaders of society on the strength of the following statement of Srimad Bhagavatam (1.5.11)".
I understood this as a sign of humility, but it seems that he was aware that he was not the 'Jagat Guru', that he wasn't the perfect person the cult of ISKCON made him into. This to me is his greatness, that knowing his own faults he had enough courage and faith in the order of his Guru to go out and do it, to great effect.
One of the greatest difficulties I have seen ISKCON devotees face when giving a Bhagavatam class, was when there where three purports in succession that stated that women enjoy rape. I forget which Canto this came from but those with Vedabase may find them. I also remember Bhaktivedanta Swami stating that in the Vedas when one wants to stress a particular topic it is mentioned three times.
I thought at the time that it seemed rather odd for him promote this point so firmly. This obviously created confusion amongst devotees. From reading ancient histories I reconciled that there are examples of this being true due to the culture of the time, but presented in modern day, this is scandalous!

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Madhava: Would you agree with this translation?

Perfect in all respects? This definitely, at least from a basic angle, represents the interpretation and vision that I have encountered by the majority of disciples of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja. One thing that I find interesting is that both before and after the statement who is perfect in all respects the descriptions are based on aspects purely based in devotional practice and vision and not on the all and all of material life and it’s subsequent planes. So is the use of the word “perfection” an example of a word that translates a bit awkwardly into English?

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Quoted from Vishnu-smriti; vacana means it's said in Vishnu-smriti. There are a number of interesting qualities in this passage of HBV.

viSNu-smRtau --
paricaryA-yazo-lAbha-lipsuH ziSyAd gurur nahi |
kRpA-sindhuH susampUrNaH sarva sattvopakArakaH || 45 ||
niHspRhaH sarvataH siddhaH sarva vidyA vizAradaH |
sarva saMzaya saMchettA nAlaso gurur AhRtaH || 46 ||

zrI-nArada-paJcarAtre zrI-bhagavan-nArada-saMvAde –
brAhmaNaH sarva-kAla-jJaH kuryAt sarveSv anugraham |
tad-abhAvAd dvija-zreSThaH zAntAtmA bhagavan-mayaH || 47 ||
bhAvitAtmA ca sarvajJaH zAstrajJaH sat-kriyA-paraH |
siddhi-trayam Ayukta AcAryatve’bhiSecitaH || 48 ||

- sarva-kAla-jJaH : the knower of past, present and future.
- sarvajJaH : omniscient.

SarvataH siddhaH could be translated as "siddha at all times". However, the other two entries above need some more explaining to get away with.

One way to look at it is that this section of HBV describes an ideal situation. An ideal which may not be a very realistic one, if I may add. Or how do you like the following:

priya-vAk priya-darzanaH zuciH suvezas taruNaH (1.39) : speaks beautifully, is charming to look at, is pure, finely dressed and youthful;
tapasvI satya-vAdI ca gRhasthaH (44) : austere, speaker of truth and a house-holder;

... and so forth. Someone should look up the Digdarsini.

Siddha can be translated both as "perfected" and "accomplished". Jagat, how absolute is the word?

All of the siddha-statements vis a vis mundane knowledge would make much sense if we took it to mean that the guru has a good overall awareness of the various fields of knowledge in this world.

DD 1.39 -
sabde pare ca nisnatam ityadina prak samanyatah sanksepena guru laksananyullikhyadhuna tanyeva visesato vistarya. kimva purvam gurvashrayananusangena gaunataya likhitva idanim mukhyatvena likhati avadatetyadina .

"The general characteristics of the genuine Guru, like being learned and pure have previously been given in brief. Now follows a more elaborate specification. Or it can be seen as a specification of the concomitant effects of taking shelter of a Guru. First the secondary and now the primary characteristics are written."

There is no explanation given of these particular words of HBV 1.44

I suppose the question in the end is this:

If we agree to this idea of the guru's being infallible in all spheres of life, then what do we do when we inevitably one day perceive him making a statement which does not correspond to the available facts, and which cannot be taken as a subjective spiritual consideration?

Ie. "Rome is the capital of France."

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

You are precisely correct here Madhava. It is a rather sad conclusion that I have found that many would simply rather argue that Rome is the capital of France as opposed to approach the philosophy and it’s various aspects from a standpoint which equates spiritual perfection with spiritual qualities as opposed to all matter.

Of course, as they have corrected me at Saraswata.net, that is just my imperfect sense daring to question that Rome is indeed the capital of France…

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Ah! Guruji was in an ecstatic trance, and when he spoke he was visualizing a previous Kali Yuga, during which Rome was indeed the capital of France!

Oh yes, and considering that there are infinite universes floating in the karanajala, make that the infinite quantum realities if you will, in which all alternative timelines and subsequent infinite possibilities must exist on account of their being the ekapada-vibhuti of the infinite, then certainly guruji cannot be telling a false thing regardless of what he says.

However, considering that most of us are restricted to this one particular universe and timeline, we will probably have to discriminate between the words of guruji describing the events of an alternative universe or an alternative time-cycle, and his words describing the current reality of our perceptions.

The question is whether guruji is aware that he describes an alternate universe or time-cycle, or whether he is already beyond that on a stage where it is all nothing but an uninterrupted and all-pervading time-space continuum filling his awareness?

Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.5.10-11):

na yad vacas citra-padam harer yaso
jagat-pavitram pragrnita karhicit
tad vayasam tirtham usanti manasa
na yatra hamsa niramanty usik-ksayah

"Those words which do not describe the glories of the Lord, who alone can sanctify the atmosphere of the whole universe, are considered by saintly persons to be like unto a place of pilgrimage for crows. Since the all-perfect persons are inhabitants of the transcendental abode, they do not derive any pleasure there."

In Srimad-Bhagavatam (7.5.30), Prahlada Maharaja has said:

matir na krsne paratah svato va
mitho 'bhipadyeta grha-vratanam
adanta-gobhir visatam tamisram
punah punas carvita-carvananam

"For those who have decided to continue their existence in this material world for the gratification of their senses, there is no chance of becoming Krsna conscious, not by personal endeavor, by instruction from others or by joint conferences. They are dragged by the unbridled senses into the darkest region of ignorance, and thus they madly engage in what is called 'chewing the chewed.' "

What we have seen and experienced in ISKCON in regards to Guru tattva, especially in the early days of the movement was that the Guru was perfect in knowledge in general, not just spiritual knowlegde. Bhaktivedanta Swami was seen as someone with perfect understanding of past, present and future. His marriage arrangements were seen as matches made in heaven. His ideas of finances were perfect. His perception of people and cultures were the words of the Vedas. Even his ability to pass from this world unto the next was seen as a display of his will. I was told by one devotee in Oct. of 1977 that 'Prabhupada will live another thousand years'!

After the passing away of Bhaktivedanta Swami that same attitude of perfection was superimposed upon the new ISKCON acaryas. However, early in their roles there was trouble ahead as Jayatirtha and Hamsaduta were deviating. Many devotees in ISKCON began to feel that this perception in Guru as perfect in all respects was failing, especially when the Gurus actually began to leave their post and practices.

In the mid eighties the Guru reform movements demanded a quiter tone from the ISKCON acaryas and more emphasis on the perfection of Bhaktivedanta Swami as the Guru of all of ISKCON. As the years go on is more of contrast is placed between Bhaktivedanta Swami and his succesor acarayas. I had heard the latest theology regarding the ISKCON gurus is that they themselves on their own have no power to act as Guru; only by the mercy of Prabhupada acting through them.

The conclusion of the biography of Bhaktivedanta Swami, the 'Prabhupada Lilamrta' stated that Bhaktivedanta Swami was a saktyavesa avatar. Bhaktivedanta Swami is therefore seen as a sort of manifestation of God. It is therefore not incredible for his followers to think of him as equal to Vyasadeva.

TEXT TWO

TEXT

atyaharah prayasas ca
prajalpo niyamagrahah
jana-sangas ca laulyam ca
sadbhir bhaktir vinasyati

SYNONYMS

ati-aharah--overeating or too much collecting; prayasah--overendeavouring; ca--and; prajalpah--idle talk; niyama--rules and regulations; agrahah--too much attachment to (or agrahah--too much neglect of); jana-sangah--association with worldly-minded persons; ca--and; laulyam--ardent longing or greed; ca--and; sadbhih--by these six; bhaktih--devotional service; vinasyati--is destroyed.

TRANSLATION

One's devotional service is spoiled when he becomes too entangled in the following six activities: (1) eating more than necessary or collecting more funds than required; (2) overendeavoring for mundane things that are very difficult to obtain; (3) talking unnecessarily about mundane subject matters; (4) Practicing the scriptural rules and regulations only for the sake of following them and not for the sake of spiritual advancement, or rejecting the rules and regulations of the scriptures and working independently or whimsically; (5) associating with worldly-minded persons who are not interested in Krsna consciousness; and (6) being greedy for mundane achievements

Rasesh, you could do us a favor and give a context to your quotes. What do you think is the point in the verse that is particularly relevant to the discussion at hand?

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Today I attempted to pose my same question at Saraswata.net and to put it mildly my questions was neither appreciated nor did anyone attempt to answer it. They simply let me know that I questions like mine should never ever be asked.

I left them with the opinion that if they want to follow through on the manifest of their website (i.e. Meeting the challenges of the 21st Century) then they need to answer such questions. Anyhow, I said my good bye to their forum. So of course I received an e-mail a few hours later stating:



Well I am glad I finally got my answer which was two fold. The first part of the answer is that anyone who disagrees with statements or sentiments expressed by Srila Bhaktivedanta Maharaja are simply materialists who want followers.

The second thing I learned is that as much as they skipped around even attempting to answer my question in any substantial way they still managed to answer my question with a resounding PERFECT IS PERFECT IS PERFECT!

Oh well...

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I think the verse is relevant because having a discussion to try and prove that a particular spiritual master has so many faults and misconceptions doesn't sound like the kind of topic that ragangua bhaktas can really get any benefit from.

thus:Prajalpa is -
(3) talking unnecessarily about mundane subject matters;

The faults in a Vaishnava would qualify as mundane subject matter.
No?

As I already said, quit gossiping!

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Well I would only be pointing out the "faults" if indeed comments based on aspects other than spiritual life or siddhanta were also a pre-requisite for the perfection of Guru. If you had even bothered, at any point, to read my post you would know that I personally DO NOT believe that to be the case. I believe the perfection is found in the perspective Guru's desire to serve Sri Guru, Caitanya Mahaprabhu, Sri Radhika, and the fallen conditioned souls. That perfection is found in the desire, focus, and devotion. However it is clear that neither yourself or the majority of members of your board really wanted to read the question as opposed to debate the faceless doubters.

My only point of contention in this regard is that if the Saraswata line does indeed view the angle of perfection to be an, all in all, in every respect both spiritual and material then I have a true lack of faith in their angle. What can I say?

For your information the reason I spoke of specific instances which I feel are questionable is if I didn’t I would be accused of making baseless comments.

Anyhow I am done trying to understand your viewpoint as it is simply clear that you want to argue and you are not concerned in trying to understand even the basic premise of my question.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

If a Vaishnava were a mundane person, his words and deeds would be mundane topics of discussion. Discussing what a Vaishnava is and what a Vaishnava isn't, as well as what a guru is and what a guru isn't, is no mundane topic. We are trying to resolve whether unnecessary and illegitimate attributes are being imposed on the concept of the guru.

If you are not happy with such discussions and feel that they are worthless prajalpa, then please do not feel obliged to participate in such discussions.

Personally, I think that the person who is the subject of the opening post of this thread was correct on all the issues that are popularly claimed as faulty.

Science has proved that women have smaller brains than men. That is accepted by modern science. However, they have also found that women's brains are wired a little differently and thereby more effecient with less mass. So, the big argument that women don't have smaller brains than men is disproved by science.

As far as statements about "black means thief" (African controversy), I have found that to most definitely be a truism for the most part, though not absolute.

I also don't believe that we went to the Moon in the 60's when technology was primitive compared to today. If going to the Moon was possible in the sixties, then if should be a piece of cake in the 21st century but nobody is going to the Moon.

So, even on the "mundane" issues that Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada is said have been wrong about, I think he was right and that the allegations that he was wrong about so many ordinary things is false.

For the most part, all these claims of Srila Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada as being so wrong about so many things is just a matter of opinion and in many cases an outright falsehood.

Prabhupada was not only a great professor of Krishna consciousness but he was also a very bright commentator on so many practical matters.

To claim that he was so wrong about so many things is just an agenda. It is not about truth.

ACBSP's statement on brain size was 32 ounces versus 64 ounces--"half the size" and "smaller" are quite different. But I think only a 10 ouncer like myself is going to reply to you because it leads nowhere...well, it may lead to some posting numerous more examples of mistakes, but that does not go anywhere, for it is said:

"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

And where did he say that? Or is this just another one of them "Prabhupada said" things that you cannot verify?

Harikesa: In this brain weight matter, the sixty-four ounce and thirty-six ounce, is that every brain, male brain, is...?
Prabhupada: No, no.
Harikesa: No. That is what they think you’ve said, that every male brain is sixty-four ounces, every woman is thirty-six ounces.
Prabhupada: No, no. The highest brain substance found in man is sixty-four ounce.
Harikesa: They did not understand that.
Nitai: He said it clearly.
Prabhupada: And the highest brain substance in woman found, thirty-six ounce. So that proportion is always there. It may be twenty ounce, forty ounce, but brain substance in man is more than the woman. That is a fact, always.

- Room Conversation after Press Conference -- July 9, 1975, Chicago

Radhe!

was not the old forum closed because of such possible outcomes of threads?
again, Mr. Rasesh is trying to prove something which he cannot.

arguing for arguments sake.

Dear Rasaraja dasa, your questions have been roaming in my mind for more than 2 or 3 years.
i also had much problems with that ISKCON/GM-type of perfection.

Srila Prabhupada´s perfection was in following the order of his guru.

i personally can live now (after so many years of blind following and swallowing) with the FACTS (yep, Mr. Rasesh) that Srila Prabhupada did some mistakes. and i strongly believe that he would do these things today in a different way.
be it on the mundane sphere (arranging marriages, gurukula,...) or on the spiritual sphere (jiva-issue, raganuga-bhakti, guru-jumping,...).

there is no use in offering these kind of critical thoughts to people who base their opinions (material/spiritual) on blind following, with all three eyes closed.
even when confronting obvious hard-to-accept-truths, these people will never accept that kind of approach.

like Madhavaji told so many times: its very very comfortable to hide behind "perfections", to feel save by just letting others think for oneself.

recently a very good friend of mine (who is banned now from ISKCON) visited our home.
we had a very nice discussion and we came to the conclusion that there can never be advancement if we dont allow us to put a question-mark behind so-called truths.
only then, by constantly reassuring our faith by being openhearted, only then can REAL faith grow.

fanatics will never allow to put question-marks like our Rasaraja das.
sad but true.

Jay Radhe!
Tarunji

PS:
dear Rasesh, i thought you would now have a nice playground in your forums?
why waste your energy with us "heavy-heads"?

Mea culpa. I don't have an original reference for "32 ounce." (I don't have folio on this pc either.) Here are references to 34 and 36-ounce.


"No Intelligent Words For This Age"
Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.21
September 26, 1972, Los Angeles


S.P. Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.6, Montreal, August 3, 1968

Urmila on the topic:

Yes, I have to agree Tarunji. It's so strange to see people put ACBSP in stone--in effect "damning" him to perennial mistakehood and ridicule--rather than using their common sense. I'd perhaps give some credit to that vewpoint if the proponents lived exactly according to the times and framework in which those words were spoken: sending their kids off to India while they dedicate themselves to book distriubution, being subordinate to their temple president and GBC, etc. If you're going to freeze time, you're gonna get awfully chilly.

I don't really have a problem with calling Prabhupada a "sakty-avesa" avatar, as I think that what he did was little short of miraculous. From a human standpoint, for a man of his age, in his state of health, to undertake such a mission and to be successful in the way he was does indeed indicate to me that he was a very special person with some divine empowerment.

However, it seems to me that Satsvarupa's book is more often accused of giving us a mundane view of the founder-acharya. Though I doubt very much that Satsvarupa intended anything like a "warts-and-all" biography, there are too many warts in it for most people, especially those on the Ritvik side of things.

I wrote somewhere on my website that it is far more inspiring for me to see how a very human Prabhupada achieved what he did than to simply write it off as divine intervention. After all, if we as sadhakas are to aspire for something, we need models as well as gods.

Possibilities are infinite. However, rest assured that if troubling rhetoric appears, our board of moderators is more than willing to remove any content they deem inappropriate. Should any such content appear, you are invited to use the "Report this post" feature, which will alert all moderators of the post you consider inappropriate.

ISKCON followers generally view Bhaktivedanta Swami to be the only one impowered to spread his mission around the world. Factually speaking, if it were not for some of his dedicated followers he would not have been as successful. Devotees like Kirtanananda, Tamal Krsna, Hamsaduta, Bhavananda, Acyutananda, Bhagavan, Jayatirtha, Satsvarupa, Visnujana, Gopijana-vallabha, Rameswara and many more, were instumental in spreading his ISKCON movement world-wide. Harikesh made thousands of devotees in the communists countries with his preaching. We cannot forget George Harrison, who without his songs of 'My Sweet Lord' and Living in the Material World', ISKCON would not have taken off in recruitment in the early 70's, the time when the movement began to take off in the west. Boy George and Annie Lenox were instrumental as well, although not as much as George Harrison, in influencing people to join the Hare Krishna movement.

The Vietnam War also played a crucial factor in devotee making in the US. It has been observed that in countries were there was war or some sort of social strife, there were large numbers of recruits made.

Many of these devotees mentioned aboved are now not practicing Krsna consciousness, as instructed by Bhaktivedanta Swami. Yet, they made a tremoundous contributation to the preaching of the teachings of Gita. How would one designate them? Would one say they were empowered by Krsna, or empowered by Bhaktivedanta Swami. To say the latter would insinuate that he is God. The power comes from one who possesses the power--shakti and shaktiman.

Here is some science to think about. women have about half the seratonin (neurotransmitter) as men. Ultimately, the size of the brain mass is not the only factor. Without seratonin, the brain cells don't do anything except set there and take up space. This is from a scientific research:


So, if we take the seratonin and it's function in consideration, men do have about twice as much brain power as women despite the comparitive difference in brain mass.
See, Prabhupada was right after all. He just presented his information in a less technical way. Practically speaking, women have half the brain power of men.

Er, right. When speaking of the weight of an object, he was actually referring to a chemical within that object. You are rationalizing toward the ridiculous; Rasaraj was rationalizing toward, well, the rational.

And since when is seratonin = "brain power"? What of all the other neurotransmitters? And are they also half?

Are you also going to argue that there have been no great thinkers who suffered from depression or sadness, evidence of low seratonin?

The equation is very simple: his statement was wrong. There is no need to fill up forums or google till the cows come home to find supporting science. It is wrong. Move on. The only result of your arguing a point that cannot be defended is that you will likely find others bringing up more and more mistakes in ACBSP in an effort to counter your obstinacy. And what purpose will that serve? It simply focuses attention on the low points and ultimately wastes time.

The prevailing science of today says that women have approxiamtely 10% less brain mass as men. Then, it says that the part of the brain where sad memories are stored is 8 times larger in women than in men. Then it says that men have 53% more seratonin than women.
All in all, I think Prabhupada was very close to the scientific facts when he said that women have half the brain of men.

This point defeated, I am willing to deal with any other misconceptions about Prabhupada that anyone wishes to throw out.

I personally am very disappointed thinking about how the Krsna Balaram mandir, Vrndavan's ISKCON temple, was primarily funded during its construction during the time Bhaktivedanta Swami was alive. One sannyas disciple of Bhaktivedanta Swami was trafficing heroin from Asia. One very close and former follower of Bhaktivedanta personally saw with his own eyes Bhaktivedanta Swami gleefully accepting the money from this devotee, knowing its sources.

When I mentioned this to some ISKCON devotees they seem to shrug it off as something not signifant. I fail see how this is insignificant. Two brothers of mine not much older than me are dead as a result of drug abuse. What would my parents think that their child who ran off to be a monk was living in a temple financed by drug money?

The problem is not that people make mistakes (I've said this before). The problem is when devotees say that Bhaktivedanta Swami was greater than Rupa Goswami, what to speak of all the other Vaisnava devotee saints who were and are followers of the Sri Caitanya Vaisnava tradition. "Everything Prabhupada did was a lila and perfect." I cannot accept this. The manner in which other Vaisnavas are minimized because they themselves did not come to the West and opened centers for preaching convinces me more and more that what was brought here in the west by ISKCON is not genuine Radha-Krsna bhakti.

It was not really like this. I also personally knew one such devotee who brought some drug money to Prabhupada and admitted where he got it from. Prabhupada didn't want to take the money but he said that if he didn't take it this disciple would go out and use it for sinful activities. He took the money and told this disciple that he was only taking it to protect him from sinful reactions and that he would never accept that kind of money again and in fact told that disciple if he ever did it again that he would be rejected as a disciple and that Prabhupada said he would never have anything to do with him again. This disciple never attempted to bring drug money to Prabhupada again and informed others who might be trying to do the same thing to forget about it or they would be rejected as Prabhupada disciples.
I think this says a lot about how merciful and kind was Srila Prabhupada that he was willing to take such a risk to try and protect a disciple.

I heard this directly from this Godbrother who was an old friend of mine. It is not second hand information.

Most of the money used to build Krishna-Balarama mandir was from hard-earned "picking" and collecting done on the the streets and in the Airports with all legal rights.

I could tell you a story about the gold they used to cover the dome there though!
It still don't diminish my faith in Prabhupada.

What did they use all that cash coming in from the jewelry store raids in Japan, I forget. Was that the dome or the temple? Anyway.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I want to thank everyone for their feedback. Some great points. It is sad that my questions has to be viewed by some to be an "attack" on anyone as that is the last thing I am doing and want to be perceived as doing. Again I do believe that Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja was pure and was specifically empowered to do exactly what he did. Do I think everything that was said, done or resulted was perfect? No, but that doesn't and shouldn't take away from what was done.

Some appreciations:

Braja made a great point about the effect of putting every word and action in stone as an absolute. When we do such we will have negatives to deal with and discrepancies arise.

Radhapada makes the point that Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja was greatly assisted by many disciples as well as the cultural/social backdrop of the time. This doesn't minimize or de-glorify the achievements; just puts them into a proper perspective.

Finally, Jagat makes a nice point which has always been at the core of my appreciation and love for Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja: I two very key moments in the beginning of my spiritual life: The first was when I was 15 on my first visit to a temple. I stayed overnight and slept about 20 minutes as I was so nervous and excited. To see mangala arti for the first time just blew my mind. The exotic smells, deities, dress of the devotees and the songs sung in this exotic language. It seriously was sensory overload; in a good way. Then when it came time for Vyasa Puja I was just blown away. I saw a geniune love and devotion to Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja and it had a deep effect on my heart to see their obvious love and dedication to this person.

The second instance was a few months later while sitting about two feet from Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja murti in Philadelphia while reading of the disappearance of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja. It broke my heart and I cried uncontrollabley for a few minutes. It literally shook my very foundation. Again the prevailing feeling on my heart and mind was to see their obvious love and dedication to this person.

Okay i apologize if I got a little emo there but that's my nature...

I agree with Jagat, and ths B.R. Sridhar Maharaja, on referring to Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja as a "sakty-avesa" avatar and for many of the same reasons that Jagat explains.

Still what I love and appreciate about Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaja lilamrta and other stories of his "person" is that, in my opinion, he was a person. An empowered, dedicated, pure hearted and incredably focused and determinned person.

In closing I want to quote a piece of Jagat's post which I really appreciated: "I wrote somewhere on my website that it is far more inspiring for me to see how a very human Prabhupada achieved what he did than to simply write it off as divine intervention. After all, if we as sadhakas are to aspire for something, we need models as well as gods."

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Swamiji says that it's 64 (men) / 36 (women) ounces. That's a 43.75% difference. Not ca. 10% as you cite the prevailing science of today. 10% is really not 43.75% regardless of how much you want it to be that.

So, men have 53% more seratonin? Seratonin is one of the thirty-something neural transmitters in the human brain. It is mainly related with the limbic system of the brain (basically responsible for linking memory with emotions), which is hardly the vital zone of the great philosophers, mathematicians and so forth.

Anyway, I think we should be returning to the factual topic at hand, if there's something more to say.

I certainly don't know much, as I was among the last of the Prabhupada disciples. I did get my brahminical initiation through the ritivk system just a few weeks before Prabhupada passed away - after he appointed the BIG-11.

The story I heard from a devotee that was with Gurukripa in Japan was that they had a system of taking the gold pens from the Japanese businessmen. They stood on the streets with a BTG in their hand and it had a 3X5 index card sticking out between the pages. As these businessmen walked down the sidewalk they reached out with the magazine and offered it to them but they all just walked by as fast as they could. At thet walked by the boys reached and said "please take a magazine" and then slightly touched them on the chest and lifted the gold pen out of their pocket with it. Apparently they collected hundreds of gold pens that way and this boy told me that Gurukripa had them melted down and turned into gold leaf and such was what was used to cover the dome at Krishna-Balarama Mandir.
However, it is important to note that Prabhupada thought the money and gold was coming from the collection programs what were all legal practices. He had no idea that Gurukripa was stealing watches and pens in Japan. When Gurukripa got caught they kicked ISKCON out of Japan. When Prabhupada found out about it he was very disturbed and told Gurukripa that because of what he had done in Japan he would never amount to anything.

Prabhupada never encouraged or promoted anything illegal. He was being told that the money being brought to him was from legitimate book distribution and collecting programs. Prabhupada was always furious when he found out that his disciples wer doing anything immoral or illegal.

Madhava says:


Actually, serotonin is one of the four main neurohumors or neurotransmitters in higher vertebrate nervous systems. I have mentioned the location of serotonin production and note here that the serotonin is transported via the bloodstream to the nerve cells throughout the body, but most especially in the neurons of the brain. Here they accumulate in the their minutest molecular form. The molecule serotonin is utilized by the nerve cells for the complete execution of electrical impulses across the synaptic gap (which is the micro-gap between every connection of every nerve cell in the entire nervous system). The impulses comes along the nerve cell going through the electro-chemical processes with the ionic forms of calcium and potassium (the two vitals of the nervous system) until they reach the terminal end of the cell's dendrites. Upon reaching the end of the electrical impulse is translated into the neurochemical serotonin. This is then "squeezed" out into intercellular space only to connect and meet the other side which is the beginning of the next nerve soma (lining of the nerve cell).

Dandavtas. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Uh, Madhava is beginning to scare me a bit ... what don't you study?

Anyhow... I would love to see the thread return back to the initial question I posed which was from a siddhantic perspective what is the definition of perfection in relation to Guru Tattva? Again I believe that it is really based on spiritual desire, surrender, greed for service and the giving of ones very being to Guru, Mahaprabhu and Sri Radhika. However there is a prevailing angle presented by many followers of specific Guru's that preach the perfection in Guru Tattva to be all pervading even in regards to social, cultural and practical matters.

I would venture to guess on the feedback from the majority members of this forum that they do not prescribe to the latter so if they could submit specific siddhnata which leads to this conclusion it would be greatly appreciated.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

"Actually," [copypaste.com]copied and pasted[/end]. Well said.

Would you then demonstrate to us how seratonin, and particularly its quantity, effects the degree of intelligence in a human being?

At any rate, that doesn't change the 43.75% of brain substance in ounces into the ca. 10%, which was the whole point relevant to this thread. We can open a separate thread for biology and neuropsychology if you wish.

One time I tried on a pair of them X-ray glasses you can get at gag shops. when I looked over at my wife I could see into her head and I saw that her brain was about the size of a walnut. You can say what you want about the size of women's brains, but I know better!

Madhava said:


Prabhupada made it clear that this information was coming from his Scottish professor. He said "generally, generally" women are less intelligent that men. That means that he also accepted that some women were not less intelligent that men. Especially, in Hindu culture back when Prabhupada was educated, Hindu women were not educated like men and they did not even have the chance to be as "intelligent" as men. With education and training, women can start to become similarly as intelligent as men. In HIndu society this was not the case up until the latter part of the 20th century.
If there is any error here, it is on the part of those educators who gave Prabhupada the wrong information. Prabhupada repeated this several times and I don't know of anybody who came forward with scientific proof to the contrary, so he just kept repeating the same thing he was taught in college. I am sure that he would have accepted the scientific proof that his figures were off. Nobody ever showed him that apparently.

Anyway, Prabhupada might have been taught some erroneous scientific conclusions by his college professors, but nobody ever offered him any proof to the contrary. The idea that women are less inteligent than men is given in the Vedic scriptures and has been the prevailing wisdom of Hindu society for thousands of years. Prabhupada was simply trying to show that there was even some scientific evidence that women had smaller brains than men and were "generally" less intelligent in a Vedic type culture.
He was wrong about the size of women's brains, so what? He was just a simple devotee trying to preach the Vedic culture. He might have used out-dated information to make his points, but that does not blemish his personal character and render him a fool.

Obviously our audience here are all pure hearted vaisnavas who have had no connection with rave/club culture. 'Ectasy' (MDMA) has been (mis)used from it's beginings in Ibiza, to clubs around the world, for the last twenty years or so. The effect of this drug is to raise the levels of seratonim in the brain. This creates hightened feelings of happiness, love and affection. Additionaly users will also experience a corresponding lack of seratonim after using this drug which may result in despondency, insecurity etc. Seratonim acts as a mood enhancer, there is no effect on intelligence whatsoever.

No, that does not blemish his character. This is not the point in question.

It is hereby clear that he (or any guru) may make mistakes if he receives incorrect information and assumes it as valid. That's all we've been talking about.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

That would explain her choice in marriage partners...

I just couldn't resist there...

Aspiring to be a servant of teh Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I believe that I, as well as the majority of devotees on this forum, have made this same exact point ad nauseam through out this topic. Glad to see that after 4 pages we finally have you stating this very point.

Now that we have all come to the same conclusion that there are elements of the teachings and/or words of the different Acaryas/Guru's which aren't written in stone. This means as followers we have to be a bit more careful about what statements we declare as 100% absolutes verse opinions and/or strategically points.

This will be an ongoing challenge as Vaisnavism continues to spread through so many various mediums and individual charismatic figures. In some respects this realization has lead to a major shift in the way I approach both our siddhanta and the various devotees I meet.

It is also a major component of why I have started to look outside of my ISKCON universe. Not so much out of disappointment in the individuals and/or their spiritual standards or realizations but due to the intense focus on one particular empowered and charismatic individual as the epitome of their experience and mindset.

Aspiring to be a servant of the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

You gotta be kiddin' me! First, the seratonin stuff you cited addresses affective states, not cognitive ability, so your assertion is here is acutally a nonsequitur. Second, the broad generalizations Srila Prabhupada made were actually expressions of cultural perspectives, not scientific truth. To make such a claim and expect to be taken seriously, you would need evidence that actually supports it. Perhaps because of the serotonin difference, women are also more prone to migraines. However, many very creative and intelligent men and women have migraine, depression, addiction, and other problems. Nevertheless, they still manage to succeed intellectually and spiritually beyond what we see in many of your arguments. Such silliness simply perpetuates an identification with the body that is counter-productive in spiritual circles.

I'd suggest that before you launch into such projects as proving that all women are stupider than men or that the Sun is closer to the earth than the Moon, you go to you local communtiy college and take a couple of composition courses so you can understand what it means to conduct meaningful research and develop your critical thinking skills. It would make your efforts much more effective. I'm not saying that to put you down but to help you in your mission. Community colleges have open-admission policies, good faculty (if I say so myself), and a very diverse student body. You may not be the oldest person in your class. And I think you'd have fun writing argumentative papers presenting Krishna consciousc perspective. I know I did back in the day (as they say nowadays).

I think the bottom for "Rupanugas" is that instead of trying to find ways to prove how intelligent women are, they should be trying to understand how Mahaprabhu felt about associating with women and what he taught about associating with women. "Rupanugas" should be more concerned with trying to understand what the Goswamis taught about women instead of trying to use modern devices and propaganda to try and circumvent their instructions and find excuses to associate with women on an equal level.

The message that i seem to be getting from the "Raganuga" camp is that one can still have a lovely wife, a fancy home, a car, a career, a fulfilling sex life and all the trappings of maya and still have his siddha-deha and be on the platform of ruci and nistha. Somehow or other I don't think that was what Mahaprabhu and the Goswamis were trying to teach. I guess the message is that you can have your cake and eat it too! I don't buy it. The message that one can have women, sex life and siddha-deha is just bogus. If one is going to follow the Goswamis then he needs to follow their example as well. Spending a few minutes a day doing lila-smaranam and then the rest of the day serving the wife and the senses is not what raganuga-bhakti is all about.

We have our cakes, we take them and we eat them and our bellies are big and full of prema.

That is not, however, the topic of the thread. Let's stay on topic.

Rasesh has just filled up his quota of critique for the participants of this forum. If he wishes to critique the participants further, he may do so in his own forums in one of the various threads dedicated to discussing our forums.

[ There is no need to unnecessarily provoke others. Post removed. - Mod. ]

Typical Kshamabuddhi operation. Like Ramachandra Puri--put a lot of food on their plate and then blame them for overeating!

But I agree that the women's brains issue is one of those tiresome recurring issues has been overdone to death in these variou discussion groups and is certainly out of place on a forum primarily dedicated to raganuga bhakti.

So you say. I was there and saw the whole thing from my spaceship when you humans first landed on the moon with your primitive yet effective technology. It was actually quite amusing.

Oh now I see why there are practically no stars on the background of the footage. Your cloaked ship covered the view. If only NASA knew.

The discussions on siddha-pranali have been split into a separate thread.

As an Indian woman I am surprised to hear Rasesh say that the lesser intelligence of women is an accepted pretense in Hindu culture. It was never accepted in mine. In fact, I was surprised to see such a sentiment being expressed in Srila BV Swami Maharaj's Bhagawad Geeta purport, especially since the original sanskrit sloka does not even remotely allude to such a thing, nor has any other original sloka in any Veda, Purana, etc, that I have come across. Nor have I ever come across any other Geeta commentator who puts forth ideas. Granted, India is a very male dominated country in some ways (that's one of the reasons I left), but even so spirituality was always the ONE domain where we womenfolk enjoyed a special status. I don't hold Srila Swami Maharaj's comments against him nor does it take away from my appreciation of all that he accomplished in the mission of Mahaprabhu. I simply see them for what they are.... his opinions. We are all entitled to our opinions.
No man's brain comes close to 64 ounces, the very numbers he qouted are off. I can copy and paste the actual facts here later. But, like you said yourself Rasesh, the numbers are irrelevent. I conducted a research some time ago on the subject and if i relocate the data you will see that brain mass does not neccessarily translate into brain power. SO many other factors are there that vary between men, women, races, cultures, etc. For example, in Bengal where I come from, the men and women both tend to be very short and petit, there brain sizes will correspond to their body sizes and hence most, if not all, American women I know have larger brain weight than most Bengali men I know. Does that mean the American women are more intelligent than those Bengali men? In general I would have to say they are but not due to their heavier brains but due to their education, awareness and experince.
True, not many women have been NOTED in history as great scientists or mathematicians or philosophers, for that matter, not many Africans, Arabs or Asians (including INDIANS) have been either. Ironic, seeing as that the Arabs were once leading the world in mathematics and scientific research and all of us here on the forum are aware of India's philosophical contribution to the world. Well I researched this phenomena too and there has been a great suppression and cover up great contributions - literary, mathematical, scientific and philosophical - of various men and women throughout history from all these cultures and more. No need to go into details here. You can google for that. I'm not really that hung up on it because in my opinion the Greeks contributed alot more to modern deomocracy and equal rights than any of the commonly known Indian philosophers anyway. Im willing to acknowledge the weaknesses of my indigenous culture. That being said I think there is a great shift in the consciousness of people here in the West in which they are wanting to discover the contributions of ancient cultures and their peoples around the world and as they do so a great many more things hereto unknown will become known. That includes the contributions of women.
Rasesh, you also seem to have issues with aspiring raganuga bhaktas being happily married.... why is that? Is a dysfunctional family life a symptom of bhakti in your eyes? That was a common belief amongst American youth in the 1960's and 1970's who joined various "cults" of the time; the Moonies, Jesus Freaks, Hare Krishna's, etc. They sought to separate themselves from the larger dominant culture and create a separate "sub-culture" which did not reflect the values of the dominant society, values like family bonding, etc. Being an Indian I can't really understand that anti-family cult mentality but, oh well, to each their own I guess.
In a large way such a mentality helped to spread the mission of Mahaprabhu on one level. Afterall, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur had also sent other disciples to England in the 1930's I believe it was but they did not return with very much numeric, quantitative success. England was a traditional and conservative culture at that time, there were no eager-to-do-something-different hippies hanging out there at that time as there were in America 30 to 40 years later. It all fit together somehow for the better.
JAI SHREE RADHE!

Evolutionary biology

Hey, big spender

Dec 18th 2003 | TORONTO
From The Economist print edition


Men lose their fiscal prudence in the presence of attractive women

YOU already knew it, but now science has confirmed it: a glimpse of a beautiful woman can change the way a man thinks. Change him, in this case, from the kind of chap who prefers $100 a year hence to $25 tomorrow, into one who simply cannot wait the extra 364 days.

Economists and psychologists have been exploring the notion of discounting the future for some time now. For most people, money today is worth more than the same amount in the future. But how about twice that in a few weeks' time? Or three times as much in a half year? It is already well-known that men discount the future more steeply than women and that certain types of people—addicts, for instance—discount more steeply than others. But it has mostly been taken for granted that the way a person discounts is a stable personality trait, and an arbitrary one.



Biology Letters





Two researchers at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, however, dispute these points. They have shown, in a study just published in Biology Letters, that an individual's discount rate can be manipulated. They also argue that the change makes good sense.

Margo Wilson and Martin Daly, famous for a study several years ago which showed that children are far more likely to be killed by step-parents than biological parents, tend to look at things from a Darwinian point of view. They reckoned the reason men discount more steeply has to do with the male reproductive imperative: score often, score early and, above all, score when you can. There is no point husbanding resources for the future when the opportunity is now. So Dr Wilson and Dr Daly wanted to see if they could put men into a “mating opportunity” mindset and temporarily alter the way those men valued present and future goods.

Over 200 young men and women participated in the study, which was divided into three parts. In the first, the participants were asked to respond to nine specific choices regarding potentially real monetary rewards. (At the end of the session, they could roll dice to try to win one of their choices, which would be paid by an appropriately post-dated cheque issued by the university.) In each case, a low sum to be paid out the next day was offered against a higher sum to be paid at a specified future date. Individual responses were surprisingly consistent, according to Dr Wilson, so the “pre-experiment” threshold of each participant was easy to establish.

The volunteers were then asked to score one of four sets of pictures for their appeal: 12 attractive members of the opposite sex; 12 non-lookers; 12 beautiful cars; or 12 unimpressive cars. Immediately after they had seen these images, they were given a new round of monetary reward choices.

As predicted, men who had seen pictures of pretty women discounted the future more steeply than they had done before—in other words, they were more likely to take the lesser sum tomorrow. As Dr Wilson puts it, it was as though a special “I-want-that-now” pathway had been activated in their brains. After all, the money might come in handy immediately. No one else was much affected. (Women did seem to be revved up by nice cars, a result the researchers still find mystifying. But the statistical significance of this finding disappeared after some routine adjustments, and in any case previous work has suggested that women are more susceptible to displays of wealth than men are.)

Dr Wilson and Dr Daly speculate that the simple act of regarding beautiful women is able to engage and manipulate the male brain's reward centres. This idea is supported by earlier brain-scanning studies which showed that looking at beautiful women, but not plain ones, arouses a man's nucleus acumbens, the part of the brain that evaluates rewards. That structure, in turn, is tightly linked to the orbitofrontal cortex, which has been shown to be activated by monetary rewards. So, ladies, it looks as though you were right. Men are just as gullible as you thought they were.

I might sometimes advocate Swami Prabhuapda's views on women as less intelligent, and compared to great geniuses like him maybe they are. However, I am in no illusions about myself being categorically more intelligent than women.
I was definitely a lot more intelligent than my wife because she was deaf, mentally handicapped and poorly educated because of all that. She graduated High School in a school for the deaf. My relationship with her had a lot more to do with compassion and caring than it did with romantic love which is something we never really had. Other than that, I do not consider myself as more intelligent than any average woman. Personally, I am not very scholarly inclined. Originally, I was attracted to Indian philosophy because of the mysticism of Hatha-yoga, meditation and the like. I came to appreciate bhakti through a step by step process through hatha-yoga, jnana-yoga, meditation etc. I was always more attracted to the mystic element of yoga than the academic aspect of scholarship and scriptural study. So, a great academic or scholar I am not. I am a spiritualist at heart - not a scholar. I also pursue the mysticism of herbology, which has been described in certain parts of the Vedic texts.

Me? Smarter than women? Not hardly. I am no illusions about that. I spent to much time behind a doobie to be a great scholar or genious. In fact, I am quite non-intellectual. I believe in love, sacrifice and compassion. I don't really place a lot of value on scholarship. I believe that the essence is what kind of human being you are - not what kind of scholar you are.