Wasting books? -

Nabadip,

Just as you suggest to Tarun that he turns his association with his tree into a win-win result, allow me to suggest that, similarly, you apply this win-win formula to your personal experience with the movement of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami. It is he you refer to when you say, "Pure Devotee Number One", is it not? Your grudge against his movement is obvious but it does not suffice as proof that "huge forests of trees" were sacrificed to print his books. And then, that his purports are "not highly palatable", well, that´s your personal favored flavor or chewing gum, is it not? And finally, that his work was simple "self-promotion", again, who is the judge that has passed this veredict? A glass roof may not be the best place under which to advice others on win-win situations. Think about it.

As per tree being cut down for books, hemp fibers make a better paper product than does wood pulp. Wood paper is slightly acidic which is the reason why paper in old books becomes flakey and chips off. Hemp paper is ph balanced and therefore has a much longer shelf life and so if you want your books to be around for many generations, try to get them printed on hemp. The reason why books aren't printed on hemp is due to marihuana legislation.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

What a ridiculous statement. Believe it or not these "not highly palatable books" have made a tremendous impact in literally hundred's of thousands of lives. In fact most aspiring Vaisnavas in the Western World owe a tremendous debt to these very books and their purports. You have the right to say or think whatever ridiculous thought you would like but I would hope that you may put a bit more thought into things you say. Like the books or not their impact in introducing the treasure of Lord Gauranga is undeniable.

To make a "point" like that in the dress of a plea for the environment is almost laughable. I am sure that if you take a look at your life and pursuits you could find a tremendous amount of wasteful activities that you take part in that make "those books" seem all the more valuable.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

We have to note, though, that for both environmental and spiritual reasons books shouldn't be produced just to be scattered around for making money. It is not once or twice I've seen BBT granthas thrown into trash cans, sometimes even momentarily after the forced purchase. One has to wonder how big a percentage of spiritual literature gets just dumped, being forcibly sold to unwilling recipients.

But all of this is a bit off topic, and probably best off split into a separate thread if you wish to pursue this line of thought.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Agreed however that wasn’t Nabadip's point. Such a circumstance can and should be illustrated through a myriad of examples ranging from Religious/Social/Political propaganda, business advertising, etc. In fact I probably receive an acre of forest a day in Credit Card offers, business advertising, political solicitations and the such. Much of it may be useful if someone was interested however most are not.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

So let us take joy in all the spam we receive, at least nobody cut down trees because of that.

Madhava,

The wish to pursue this line of thought is not exactly there until a too simplistic proposition provoques the tought. So split or not, the subject of books in Iskcon being "scattered around for making money" is a highly debatable issue. You will have to agree with me that no sane investor on this planet would recommend that one joined Iskcon and sold books to make a profit. The books were printed and sold for spiritual purposes. I am surprised that this issue is still being seen by informed bhaktas like yourself in so simplistic a manner. What was (or still is) the percentage of all the purchases that can be considered "forced"? And of those that were and are, how is the decision made that these were/are detrimental to the purchaser? I believe the real contention in this issue, wherever it exists, is more with the contents of the books than with their existence and manner of distribution. And this then is yet another issue.

I can only speak of the environment I grew in. Of course it isn't a simplistic division into two, either business or spiritual reasons. Sadly, we often find that the former outshadows the latter when it comes to efficiency vs. customer care. The distributors are too busy to spend a moment with the customer, explaining how to read the book and get the most out of it (especially with texts such as BhP and CC), as they are in a rush to run to the next person to sell sell sell yet another book, and grab another point for the scoresheet.

I remember, for the centennial, they printed huge stacks of these Prabhupada-brochures, that were 0.10 points each. Though the idea was to mainly give them out bundled with books, people would pass them around here and there, sticking them to the windshields of rows of cars at parking lots and so forth, only to have them muddled by the rain. But hey, what wouldn't you do for those few more points to get to the top of the list and have the cheers ("best wishes") of the assembled devotees. Still, we frequently come across people who bought books as "stories from the silk road" (BhP 1st canto) or "a travel journal through India" (CC Madhya), or "guidebook to meditation" (BhP 8th canto).

= = =

I'm splitting this to a separate thread. See if you want to continue it or not. If not, we'll have it retired.

I don´t mind to talk about this. Like it or not, we must accept that Iskcon is a branch of the Chaitanya tree and must learn how to make a win-win situation off its existence.

Maybe we could outsource some of our book distribution?

Actually, its interesting.. I had a conversation with an ISKCON devotee about why the books were not printed on better stock, with better quality & sold in bookstores, etc.

Apparently, bookstores will not stock items that can be purchased through other than their 'known' distribution outlets... (Im sure demand plays a large part as well...) I have for one wondered why many of the books get a rather low quality printing if they are so highly valued... This seemed to answer my question at the time.

Well, which bookstore would pay you anything for your books, if you had your guys running around with a stack of them and selling them for an ambiguous "donation"?

The idea of book distribution in Iskcon was not to create a market for literature but to establish a foundation for the creation of an alternative, spiritual lifestyle. Any type of literature found at bookstores are there precisely because the market is also already there.

Like any other product, books must have a ready market to turn out a good profit. In the West, a profitable market for gaudiya vaisnava literature is as limited today as it was 30 years ago. Well, almost still as limited. Mandala Media for example, a succesful publisher of esoteric titles, would not survive today if only printed gaudiya vaisnava literature, even of the best quality in print. Which Mandala Media actually accomplishes, prize winning and all. But bookstores will not sell devotional literature published by MM. They have to market their highly valuable titles almost directly to devotees, mostly Iskcon or GM readers. And such market would be even smaller if the platform wasn't there, formed by the controvertial book distribution of the past. Because there is no other actual system of forming such platform to compare with, Iskcon's remains the most effective on the market.

Quite true. Vaishnavism is still very much a fringe thing. Will it ever be anything else but that ? It's hard to say, but I tend to think so. The cultural leap is huge. The only way I see it happening is if someone writes a book something like, "Seven rules about running a business from the Bhagavad Gita." Or "Ancient India hints at improving your relationships." "How to use the Bhagavatam to make a pile of money in the stock market."

It may be possible to do something like that. The Buddhists are. The front page of the Globe and Mail business section the other day was about a new book on business based on "Buddhism".

Jagat, you missed the most important one; "Using the Srimad Bhagatam to quadruple your sensual pleasure."

Or "The Bhagavad Gita Code; Ancient Indian Scripture Predict Modern Day Events and How To Survive the Coming Apocalypse."

If vaisnavism is a fringe thing, gaudiya vaisnavism is yet a fringier one. But, differing from Jagat’s view, I don’t believe that for one or the other to really “happen”, books that cater to contemporary lifestyles and corresponding aspirations are going to be necessary or even helpful. I mean, if one really have the time and patience to look into publications on the market proposing such hybrid ideas, one will see that much of the ideals of original doctrines these hybrids piggyback on have been remarkably altered so to become marketable. I suspect that the original character of gaudiya vaisnavism is not a negotiable one, hence it being bypassed by the extreme efficient and opportunist contemporary business world.

It seems to me for the world to take an interest in Gaudiya Vaisnavism as a profitable lifetime investment, it will take time and development of a genuine product. We Gaudiya Vaisnavas are not even easily buying into each other’s ideas yet, are not quite finished a product.

I just noticed this post from Kshamabuddhi. I don't usually pay much mind to KB, but I would like to say the following at the risk of repeating myself.

First of all, I have not been very active here of late, and most of what I have been posting is the result of my work on Madhurya-kadambini rather than out of exchanges with other devotees. I only saw Nabadip's post a few days after it was made, and had already elicited responses.

Nevertheless, I hope I have made it clear enough that I have nothing but admiration for anyone who is struggling to serve Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, to chant and preach the Holy Name, whatever their shortcomings. If Krishna says "Everyone is on my path", then why should I feel any grudges against those who are chanting Krishna's names and who feel joy on hearing the names of Rupa Goswami and Srimati Radharani?

That being said, I don't want this to be a police state. I have great affection for Nabadip and many others who still feel varying degrees of bitterness or condescension toward Iskcon and the GM (IGM) and who have left those organizations, especially if they have sought out more traditional forms of Vaishnavism. If people sometimes come here and vent or find fault with Iskcon or its founder, I think that we can reasonably allow some liberty.

So I approve Anand's response, which struck the appropriate tone, in my opinion. We are looking for a win-win situation. Not that "traditional Vaishnavas" are the winners in some kind of cosmic struggle with the IGM. In God's eyes, there are no winners, no losers. "samo'ham sarva-bhutesu na me dvesyo'sti na priyah." It is by our pure dedication to whatever path we have chosen that we make progress. "ye bhajanti tu mam bhaktya mayi te tesu capy aham" Let's keep Vaishnava character at the forefront of our own efforts and not get caught up in sectarian battles.

========

As to Anand's comment on the books. I agree again. I was being a bit facetious. Nevertheless, even from a religious standpoint, we have to be able to understand and present our siddhanta in ways that intelligent people will be able to understand, mostly for the following reason: Though people in the West who have already converted may find it nourishing to their faith to repeat the words of the tradition as they have been presented in another time and place, the real safeguarding of their faith will come when it can be interpreted according to the categories, vocabulary and psychology of Western man.

This is a difficult task. It requires the genuine art of a translator--understanding two symbolic languages--that of Vaishnavism and that of Western religion and religious studies. Whether these will be best sellers or not, I don't know. My general impression is that the milk still needs thickening. It takes deep understanding to make something simple.

They were printed to promote Iskcon. The books were used to spread vaishnava-aparadh over and over.

No reasonable commentator of Bhagavatam or CC, printed his product in an endless series of volumes, and most the languages of the world. The man could have seen what is happening, use some self-restriction (e.g. guard his tongue, be a Swami), and cut down his volume of repetitions.

Another thought: If the man had WRITTEN one book, he would have been more considerate for sure. Instead he SPOKE them, and his utterings had to be printed...

Admittedly there is quite a bit of repetition there, and one has to wonder, if that were edited out, whether the books would shrink by a factor of three or eight.

Every year there are at least 15.000 newly written books on that planet - many not written but uttered by men/women and from a certain point of view they are all vaishnava-aparadh over and over. Jagat prabhu certainly does the only right thing, dont look left, dont look right, dont look back, concentrate on your lifework only so we can follow.

No reasonable person on the planet today can agree with this. If aparadha was spread, certainly that wansn't what the books were intended for.

But if you keep insisting in this line of 'reasoning', then you are the one perpetrating aparadha and creating impasse.

So Jatayo is right when he says that Jagat's is the example to be followed. Why don't we try that one?

Having just endured the US election I find that my tolerance for boorish arguments is at an all time low, so please excuse me for responding here even though it will likely serve little purpose.

"The man" wrote many books. Indeed it was his writing that brought him to the attention of BSST and resulted in Gaudiya Vaisnavism reaching Western shores in a major way. Included in these writings were the BTG articles covering a span of 20+ years, BG commentary, 1st Canto, small manuscripts such as Ramananda Samvad, etc. (But these were all written to "promote ISKCON," a society that did not even exist at the time.)

If you were to also take a little more balanced view of how the dictations began, three primary factors come to mind: 1. the typewriter was stolen, 2. a tape recorder was provided, 3. disciples with above average literary skills, such as Hayagriva, appeared. Perhaps we should condemn "the big (blue) man" for making such an arrangement? Or are we to assume that the mythical other Gaudiyas who could have come but didn't would have faced different circumstances all together?

Agreed. While some Vaishnavas may certainly have taken offense at some of the statements therein, I doubt it was intentional in the sense that he knowingly set out to offend others.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Seriously I wonder if you (Nabadip) even believe what you write or is it the thrill of getting a reaction partly to blame? Regardless I agree with Braja and Anand that the inability to see the books and ACBSP for what he was is a shame.

Believe it or not many of ACBSP's discussions are turned into books because there is a demand for them. I mean they don’t just print them to allow them to sit in a storage unit nor do they distribute most on sankirtana. The point is followers of ACBSP enjoy these books and they are integral to their spiritual life and their continued desire to chant the holy name. That makes them anything other than a waste.

The only waste I see is you wasting your time trying to assert something that is obviously subjective at best.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I understand the implications of my statements well. I wish to repeat, however, that the books under discussion spread vaishnava-aparadh of the highest type (that is: aparadh to vaishnavas of the highest type) the world over. No sweet talk is ever going to cover this up. And no amount of cross-overs into the traditional Gaudiya world, resulting from connection to these books, is going to change, what to speak of to justify that. The fact that these unnecessarily voluminous books spread vaishnava-aparadh is well-proved by the fact that each and every practitioner of the creed which those books advocate, is speaking its language regarding the "sahajyas" of the traditional lines. Those books have created a culture of aparadh which is not even noticed anymore, and that is truly shocking.

I think, once in a while these things have to be said again.

Look really close and you will see that there is a growing interest in “sahajiyas” among devotees these days. But it is a healthy interest, one that is producing a movement towards finding a solution to this culture of vaisnava aparadha. Those who still strongly crusade against “sahajiyas” are actually helping to spread this interest. In the end, honest and intelligent devotees are sorting things out and are finding that, although the past can’t be changed, this culture of vaisvava aparadha must be reversed. I think you just have to be forgiven in your heart and give it time for people to find words that will satisfy you but that will not be disturbing to others, so not to perpetrate the cycle of offenses.

Sorry Nabadwip - your justification for your statements is false. Every person who reads the books or follows in their wake is an offender of vaishnavas of the highest type? That is simply hyperbole and completely untrue. Many devotees in various 'camps' adopt 'offensive' attitudes towards others - this is not something that only happens in Iskcon/GM - it is a universal phenomena - weak faith requires and enemy. It is a function of the kanistha mentality and beginners are there in all lineages.

Who are the high devotees you are talking about that are the object of aparadha within BBT books? I don't recall ever reading about any particular person in the 'traditional' lineages who is denigrated. What I do recall reading is that there are people who make a show of devotion but who are addicted to sex and other mundane pleasures of the world. This is obviously true of many in Iskcon and GM so I don't see why anyone would take offense at generic instructions meant to help sadhakas ascertain who is who in order to help them seek and find assocaition that will help them rather than degrade them. Don't get hung up on labels. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta put tilak on his brahmana using the salagrama sila as a nutcracker to show that the point is universal and not a knock on the smarta community in particular - we are meant to understand the principle and see where it applies.

Don't let your own bitterness cloud your vision.

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

The instances I would imagine some would take objection to, that I can think of for now, are:

(1) Calling Radharaman Charan Das Baba and his followers (namely, those who chant "Nitai Gaura Radhe Syama") "unscrupulous" and "less intelligent devotees" (CC 1.7.4), "sahajiyas" and "imaginative devotees" (CC 1.7.168) and "prakrita-sahajiyas" who "do not know the principles of Vaishnava philosophy" (CC 1.8.23).

(2) There are instances where he criticizes the hereditary goswamis, such as CC 1.12.27, calling them smartas whose writings one "should cautiously avoid reading". Regardless, these lineages have preserved the Gaudiya tradition, and even it so happens to be that many persons in the ISKCON parampara were initiated by the so-called caste goswamis. However this critique is not very specific, and moreover he often says that there are "many caste goswamis", not presenting a blanket condemnation.

(3) He calls those, who hold the opinion that only the goswamis born in the vamsas of Nityananda and Advaita are to be called "Prabhupada", "prakrita-sahajiyas who are not worthy of being called Vaishnavas", and "who fall into a hellish condition". Why? "They are opposed to addressing a pure Vaishnava as Prabhupada" ... "they are envious of a bona fide spiritual master". (CC 2.10.23) Now, most Gaudiya Vaishnavas maintain the convention that only those descending in various Prabhu-vamsas are addressed as Prabhupada. Of course there are noteworthy exceptions there ("Rupa Goswami Prabhupada"), but many do not look kindly at the idea that one elevate himself to such heights.

Then, there are of course several instances where he speaks rather harshly of his godbrothers, many among whom (namely those who belong to either of the two original factions) who have in his view become useless. (CC 1.12.8) This friction is particularly pronounced in his commentary on Caitanya Caritamrita. However I wouldn't imagine that this was a source of contention for anyone outside the Gaudiya Math.

All in all, I think the cry for aparadha is a bit overrated as far as his books are concerned. For example, there isn't a single instance where you could find the words "sahajiya" and "babaji" even in the same purport.

Sri Sri Siksastakam, 2nd verse page 29.

Sadhu Ninda (Blaspheming The Saint)

from the commentary by

Sri Ananta Das Babaji Maharaja

Blaspheming the saint is a grave offense, and is called mahad aparadha. A sadhu is a devotee of God through whose preaching the holy name has become world famous. How can the holy name tolerate blasphemy of such a person? Many people think that there is no harm in discussing the fault of some devotee who is engaed in some wicked activities, because that criticism is true and justified, but Sripada Sridhara Svami writes in his commentary on Srimad Bhagavata: nindanam dosa kirtanam - "There is no question whether the devotee who is under discussion is at fault or not, speaking bad about such a person is called blasphemy." It is natural we wonder: "Who are these devotees, offending whom we commit an offense to the holy name?" In his book Madhurya Kadambini, Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti gives the answer; "It is not proper to think that only those devotees who are merciful, nonviolent, tolerant etc. are to be considered saints, and that those who are not endowed with such qualities are not saints, and that one can thus blaspheme them without committing an offense to the holy name. Actually, anyone who worships God, be he deceitful, ill-behaved, hypocritical and unclean, is a saint, and to blaspheme or criticise such a person is an offense to the holy name. Sri Krishna Himself says in Bhagavad Gita (9:30) "Even if one commits the most abominable activities, he is to be considered a saint when he exclusively worships Me, for he is on the right path." Those who have fixed the thought in their mind, "I will be blessed by worshipping the Supreme Lord", and who do not worship demigods, but only the Supreme Lord, are saints, even if they misbehave, and to criticise even them is an offense to the holy name.

In a sense printing paragraphs like that in books is also a way of wasting paper, because nobody seems to give a damn even if it's said a dozen times over!

I love Radharaman Charan Das Baba, how someone could not see his love of Nityananda is beyond me.

People are disconnected in many levels, not only in relation to the issue of commiting or having commited offenses. The fact that so many of us find ourselves stagnant in spiritual life is already a consequence of aparadha, individual or collective, I believe.

From his dead bed, Bhaktivedanta Swami asked forgiveness of all he had offended. That is the example to be followed, I believe.

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

the difference being that we should NOT wait until our deathbed. Furthermore it should be something we think about on a daily basis. That isn;t to say that ACBSP did or didn't, I was not within his mind or heart, but we should never think that we can wait to resolve such issues.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I am a bit late responding here. But I just want to let the readers know where I am coming from at this time. I have not much access to the Internet lately, and spend very little time on Gaudiya discussion. Coming in only briefly (but being somwhat conversant with topics and discussion-styles from earlier on)gives me a different perspective of what is being discussed and how. Generally I feel that rationalization is given too much weight here, but that is in the nature of an intellectual approach. A grounded, open-eyed, down-to-earth approach seems often more adjusted for me.

As far as vaishnava-aparadh is concerned we see two approaches: Some that come with definitions "who is a vaishnava", with this silly term "bona fide" added or not, and others who go by their own experience and can bow to anyone who is in connection, who has a heart-felt conection to the holy name and a vaishnava-tradition, whatever it may be called. Those who go around with the preconceived notion in the West are now in the majority, and that is unfortunate, and the source of that misfortune are those books which cloud peoples' visions for the reality as it is, as it is for everyone anew each moment as they venture into the world of vaishnavas.

When I introduce the notion of vaishnava-aparadh here, I do mean vaishnavas like Tinkudi Goswami who was maligned not long ago on the Internet: I am talking of vaishnavas who are revered as siddha-mahatmas in the Dham. I am also talking about mahatmas who where never seen by Westerners, who did or do their bhajan somwhere in the holy Dhams unnoticed by the large crowds. They are offended not personally, but inclusively, and this was/is done by these big-shot self-styled gurus who pretended they had a mission to tell everyone who is who in the holy world of vaisnavas. (I do mean here the Gaudiya Math founder and the Iskcon founder in particular).

I have read Ksamabhuddhi's statements in his saraswata forum, the link to which Jagatji provides. Frankly I feel sorry for KB. I have slept at KB's side in the same brahmachari Ashram in San Jose more than 20 years ago; I know who he is and where he comes from. I am really sorry to say that he is now in the camp of those who slandered Sri Tinkudi Goswami and all others not long ago. I do not feel better than him because of that, I am just sorry that his vision is so clouded that he does what he does. I understand well that he condems me for what i am saying about the wasted books. Yes: they are not only a waste, they are extremely detrimental to spiritual life of those who are becoming vaishnavas thru them.

The traditions of the Gaudiya vaishnavas out there in the villages of Bengal and Vraja Dham have no relation to the contents of those books.

One word to the term self-promotion that I used. When you read a real Bhagavatam like the Gita-Press edition (2 Volumes), or even the Ramakrishna Math edition (5 thin volumes), or also the edition by Sri N. Ranganathan (2 Volumes), you will see that the Bhagavatam stands in its own light. The Bhagavatam explains itself. In the Iskcon edition however, the Bhagavatam is used to promote a view of the commentator. It is no coincidence that the author is said to have said that the purports were more important than the translations... Indeed the purports tear the narration of events appart, the Bhagavatam is not allowed to flow on its own, to develop its own dynamic that reads like a detective story if read in an uniterrupted version.

With self-promotion I also meant that the commentator used the texts as an excuse to promote his own agenda which may be his idea of spreading Krishna consciousness in whatever way he understood it. But by doing what he did he hid the proper qualities of the Holy Bhagavatam, so much so that now hardly any serious non-fanatic person can read and get acquainted with that Bhagavatam on a mature level, without getting tired of those often unrelated comments that tear the Bhagavatam appart.

This fact is simply illustrated by a recent event in the house of a devotional person in the U.S. who invited friends to attend a program presented by Iskcon Atlanta. When an Indian Sanskrit knowing lady attending saw the Gita-Press Bhagavatam she was struck by its beauty, while the Iskcon vaishnavas who tried to promote their books as supreme "Vedic literature" were embarrassed to death to hear such praise of things they did not know.

I am not writing to convince anyone. I am just reporting the way I see things. Once in a while a person may come in here who is not affected yet by the Iskcon/GM views.

I just want to let them know there is a sane alternative to this nonsense spread by the big-shot-gurus who are now worshiped by people from the West. In the traditions of the old Gaudiyas they are hardly noticed even.

Friend: Read a real Bhagavatam. Skip those wasted books. Save your soul.

Jai Nitai.

Kudos to Nabadip. I agree with him wholeheartedly. ACBVS's books are largely a waste of time and paper. I said something similar long ago in some issue of Nitai-zine. If one were to remove all of the repetitions from his books (and of course all of the Vaisnava aparadha) and keep what is left, one would have in one volume the most important elements of his teachings. That would be valuable. But to go on bringing out volume after volume of almost mindless repetition leads to what one would expect in any such exercise ... ad nauseam.

A dear friend of mine was one of the Vaishanavas that ACBVS came to ask forgiveness from and through him many other Vaishanavas; my friend told ACBVS that he had the time to make things right again by exposing the fraud, by exposing the lies and vaishanava aparadh he had commited and caused countless others to commit, but ACBVS would not do that! He had the chance to correct things, but instead he just asked for forgiveness - he apparently took no action to mend all the countless Vaishanava aparadh that he personally did and caused, as i mentioned, countless others to commit. What to do?



The above is true and is a nice thing.***(look below).



Untrue!




Whereas it is nice that there are folks in the world who get alot out of AC'S books and it helps their spiritual life as Rasaraj says***, still the books are creating within even them some wrong ideas and views of traditional and Realized Holy Vaishanavas. Overall what Nabadip says is something we must really look at ESPECIALLY in our individual efforts to clean out our own misconceptions, negative and offensive training in mind/attitude, etc that we have picked-up from I & GM. Alot of which is unconscious and very hard to realize we carry within us. one example: when I first came on here I read something about nishta in practice where Jagat (kindly excuse me here) somehow thought and lead on that doing 16 rounds was part of this nishta (being fixed in practice) and then Madhava (kindly excuse me here) let me believe by a warm friendly gesture that I would have to do two lakhs of Name or 128 rounds to make up for 8 of us to complete our Holy Name japa daily regime - which means he (Madhava), like Jagat are of the belief that we traditional Vasihnavas do 16 rounds of the Holy Name Japa as a daily nishta practice. That comes from Iskon, our tradition do 64 rounds of Japa of the Holy Name each day - not 16. This is not an example of aparadh at all, but see how we have mis-conceptions at different times that come originally (my guess) from ACBVS. Let alone the offensive stuff lurking in our unconscious by reading his purports and believing them - we have no choice when we do not know any better!

One last thing is that another friend of mine who worked quite a bit on the CC - editing it - he told me that he took out some of the worse Vaishanava aparadh that he had ever seen ACBVS put on paper! That stuff never got into the publication thanks to this friend!

We just have to be honest about it all and do the best we can to stop the cycle of ninda/aparadh and painstakeningly remove the junk from our hearts. We stop the cycle by doing more than talking about it and asking forgiveness and giving forgiveness - although that is a good place to start.


PEACE PEACE PEACE

I do not understand. I think I made it abundantly clear in an earlier conversation we had that I do not think 16 rounds is the desirable standard, but rather from one lakh upwards is.

If memory serves, the comment on 16 rounds and nistha was made in a very specific context, namely in the context of what ISKCON folks might consider as nistha. Jagat may comment further on his own statement if he is around and reading, I'll settle for speaking myself on the rest.

The suggestion for chanting on behalf of all of us was obviously made in jest. The idea of two lakhs had surfaced earlier in our chat, so it seemed a befitting pun. Of course I or Jagat do not think that anyone can chant rounds on others' behalf. I could have just as well said that you could perhaps chant 512 rounds or eight lakhs, or that we could perhaps all chant sixteen rounds a week to keep a more relaxed pace. This really does not amount to "our being of the belief that traditional Vaishnavas do 16 rounds as a daily practice". We may be ignorant, but not that ignorant. Please!

In an earlier discussion, you wrote:


I wrote: "I do not believe I have once said that 16 rounds is the befitting nAma-sAdhana. I believe I have been fairly consistent in saying that we should encourage everyone to chant a lakh or more. I have not been up to a lakh lately since I have kept extremely busy with a number of projects and work to make some money, too, but during my upcoming stay in Vraja this will certainly be remedied."

Perhaps this message has been misplaced, or for other reasons you have not had the chance to read it. A day prior to what you wrote, I wrote (and I believe you were around to read it): "Rest assured none of us have any objections towards chanting a lakh or two. Certainly we all -- if not thus engaged already -- are striving towards that goal. We just cannot see how it could possibly be enforced in a fruitful manner."

I also suggested (September 30th) the following to be amended somewhere into the document outlining the principles of the upcoming Sri Chaitanya Foundation:


All that considered, I am at loss as to what the problem here is.

I think it's quite humorous that this thread was split from "Cutting Down a Big Tree." Hopefully we are somehow developing a vision for protecting the Chaitanya tree.

JD33-ji, I think you have misunderstood what Madhava and Jagat were saying, but they can answer to that themselves. It is an interesting example though of how we find and use examples that have meaning to us individually but which don't translate in the same manner to our audience and which may not in fact be true.


I used to teach teenagers and found myself working very hard to always think, "What are they seeing? How does this sound to them? Does it make sense? Is it interesting?" I had to always consciously place myself in their position or else the class was useless. These days I find myself doing the same thing for outsiders, for the archetypal "me." I look and think about what would interest your average person in bhakti. What would impress them so much that they'd become eager to learn about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? Unfortunately this is a huge challenge. Who would be interested in entering such a fractious arena?

Somehow tens of thousands of people have been introduced to Krsna by the work of ISKCON. In an outright condemnation of everything ISKCON, we immediately present the spiritual seeker with a huge conundrum: what kind of a God would allow so many people to be misled? What kind of a cruel joke is this--the first major excursion of Chaitanya Vaisnavism into the West is fake, is predicated upon offense?

And what practical evidence can that newcomer see that would prove that the true mission was in the hands of the traditional lines only and that it was open to them, as Westerners? They'd see a couple of dozen Westerners who took to those lines. Many of them fell away; some of them practice; some reject key aspects of their own tradition; some seem almost dependent upon the organizations that they repudiate for a good deal of their drive and message. The example isn't much different from the fakes. And why isn't the "real" more noticeable, self-effulgent, overwhelming or enticing? Why would Mahaprabhu's representatives be so inaccessible?

The bottom line for me is that it's not a pretty picture. I wouldn't like to be that newcomer. Well, frankly, I am that newcomer. I am a person saddened and confused by the world of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. I sit somewhere between Israel and Palestine, between the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, between the Hindus and Muslims of Kashmir. Everyone has a great reason to fight. They killed my sister, maimed my mother, stole my land. The closer to home the pain, the more reason to fight.

Personally I am done with crusades. I hope that there is a place for yellow-bellied reason. There has to be as there is no end to the reasons for our fights. For instance--and please don't take this as an attack or as a defence of IGM--take the example of "caste Goswamis." Do you think that BSST or ACBSP alone embody the objections to the idea of spiritual heredity? That's an idea that's objectionable to many, both in modern India and in the West. It's an objection that was going to come up, an inescapable issue. Personifying and ascribing the whole issue to those two personages isn't a solution.

I don't know what the solution is. Personally I'm not prepared to be "born again" to one side or the other on this or other issues. I'd like to be the Everyman.

[insert Talasignal or Babuism here for Zen moment or smile]

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Okay... not trying to start a fight here. Really this was just something to smile about.

Thinking about the idea of waste... such can be said of valuable time in ones life and, of course, valuable webspace:

"Nitai's posts and website are largely a waste of time and webspace. If one were to remove all of the repetitions from his posts and site (and of course all of the Vaisnava aparadha) and keep what is left, one would have in one volume the most important elements of Nitai's thoughts on ACBSP. That would be valuable. But to go on bringing out volume after volume of almost mindless repetition leads to what one would expect in any such exercise ... ad nauseam."

I don't want to make the cover of the next issue of Nitai Zine!

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

On a serious note I do agree that there are aspects of ACBSP's presentation and words which I find highly questionable. I simply prefer to offer my respect and gratitude while focusing on what I have found which I feel is more adventageous to my spiritual life and aspirations.

What I would like to hear from Nitai and Nabadip is who and what they are today. What inspires them and has captured their hearts; the rest should be left in the past where it belongs. Of course if someone asks you should share your thoughts, experiences and the such but if you truly wish to expose aspiring sadhikas to something better than you should highlight what is better in and of itself because if you only do so in comparison with something else it makes one wonder if you really have found something all that wonderful.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Thanks Rasaraj,

I found your parody quite funny and of course truthful, since there is a bit of truth in every piece of humor. Yes, I have been quite repetitive and I deserve to have the hose turned on me. Still, in my defense, I have only wasted some electrons which are quite plentiful. Trees unfortunately are not.

What do I look forward to? I look forward to joining my guru in service at the feet of Radha and Krishna some day. My way is however blocked by a number of obstacles, the most serious of which is composed of all of the misconceptions and misrepresentations I was burdened with when I was a member of ISKCON. Those are very hard to hunt down and eradicate, because over the years I have come to take them for granted. Now I have to go through and re-examine everything.

Yes, what you and others say it true. IGM has exposed thousands of people around the world to Krsna and Caitanya. In doing so it has also unfortunately burdened them with those same misrepresentations and misconceptions. Unless those things are straightened out, those thousands are doomed to sink gradually back into the ocean of material existence with very little to show for their "exposure." Wait! Most of them have already sunk into that quagmire. It is probably too late.

I hope to take some time to respond to you all, but first want to say that I thank everyone who is involved in this disscussion - I feel a great appreciation for you all! There are some mis-understandings , and sorry that those are the things being responded to rather than the actual point I was trying to make. I feel very happy at the thought of Jagat, Madhava, Braja and you Rasaraj - (of course Nitai dasji is my Guru dadaji and good friend - I wish someday you all get to know him - he is pretty advanced on the Caitanya/6 Goswami path, with depth and sincerity. He knows this Path more than anyone here, (and in my opinion) even Jagat (who I know you all love - Hi Jagat ). The depth and maturity of his knowledge and understanding is something hardly anyone here want to really understand. Its a shame, but understandable - his outside expression (his website) have not quite caught up with his inside developement, but that is something websites do - get far behind.

It is a very interesting thing - we are trying to have you grasp the level of Vaishanava Aparadh excisting in IGM - it is to the degree that they should be 'not respected from afar', but rejected - and those influenced from them should seriously reflect how to take the above a bit more seriously and take some time to reflect on the attitudes, patterns of thought, etc that they have ingrained in them from that exposure. If Sri Ananta Das Pandit ji actually knew the type of serious aparadh AC and his disciples have done and do, he (I think) would actually suggest you reject it as well. But I would never bring that kind of horrible news to a Great Great Vaishanava like him. (for those of you who may not know - I have lived in Vraja many years before most of you ever heard of Sri Ananta das Babaji - and I have known him and many many other Great Babas while living the life of a Babaji in Radha Kund in the 70's and early 80's - I would visit him often for Vaishanava charan dust kripa while doing kund parikrama and sit at his afternoon readings (path) both in Radha-kund and Vrindaban. I am asking you to appreciate that this/my tradition is a wonderful tradition and has very little to do personally, with IGM. I want to make clear that all of you (Braja & Rasaraj, etc) who have dear friends from and still in IGM don't need to reject them - they are your friends! but to be careful to weed-out the negative patterns of thought and behavior and Bad karma from being involved with IGM. I am asking that we try not to become reactive to this, but instead try to understand it. Not to take all this personally, but more objectively as merely baggage to clean up - but baggage that is offensive (smells bad).

Btw - Braja - I am not talking about the 'caste gosvami' question. I have not been refering to that at all. Sorry I am not informed about that in order to write anything.

Kindly don't take this personally, but I wonder what is motivating you to 'preach' to begin with - let alone preach a tradition you are not even initiated in? wouldn't it be more effective to know about a tradition and have at least 10-15 years of practice in it before one 'shares' it with others? I aslo find it hard to believe that Madhava and others with hardly 3-4 years of overall 1/2 time practice also feel a 'need' to 'preach'. My tradition is not a 'preaching tradition'. We are a practicing tradition that is open for sincere people to come and practice as well. (For what I am saying I look to the 6 gosvamis and to Sri Ananta Das Pandit). None of these 7 people feel a need to preach and convert others for ego gratification....do they? am I wrong here? I wish that those of you who would benefit from waking up out of the IGM mentality would do so and do so quickly. Kindly do not take offence to this - try to understand it. Especially Braja - who has a developed ability to put himself in the shoes of others.

Madhava - sorry you choose to react to what was so unimportant - I was using that past exchange we had to emphasize the point that we have alot of baggage inside of us that we are unaware of and that is what gets us (and others) into trouble!

Enough for now - this takes so much time. Ugh. Be well Everyone.

Just a quick note. I think, Madhava, that JD33 has you by the short hairs. It is true your comment about his chanting 2 lakhs for all of us (we were eight at the time) was a joke, but in that joke your maner bhAb was revealed, namely that you thought that 16 rounds a day was the appropriate amount of japa for someone in our tradition. You should just admit it and quit trying to pull off that jerky and stiff hermeneutic dance of denial you always begin to perform.

Give me a break, will you? So all those statements I have made to the extent of chanting 64 rounds and so forth are now outweighed by your perceptive insight about my true inner moods revealed in that joke. If I ever write a book, I'll make sure you won't be the one to write a tika on it.

I'm glad you have now begun chanting a lot and all that, and I hope you will keep doing that forever. However please stay off others' hairs about this, especially when it involves projecting others as lesser due to whatever reasons.

Begging your pardon, but you are not exactly in a position to judge whether I have been engaged in 1/4 time practice, 1/2 time practice or 6/5 time practice, as I believe you do not know me in person. Nor do you even know of the quantity of years I have been engaged in bhakti-sadhana. That aside, I would suppose that in presenting our tradition to others, learning in the scriptures and history of the tradition would also contribute to the eligibility of the speaker. There are an awful lot of people who have been around for decades and who are still at a loss when they would have to explain even a basic philosophical issue on the basis of our scriptures.

As for the feeling of a need to do something, if my guru requests me to go forth with bhakti-prachar, then I like to think that that ought to be reason enough to feel a need to do it. Wouldn't you agree?



Why do you equate preaching with ego gratification? Is that all you can think of it? As the outcome of our efforts dozens of sincere people have come to hear of the message of Sri Chaitanya and have taken an interest in raganuga-bhakti, and all you can see is ego gratification?

You say, our tradition is not a preaching tradition. Do you mean to say we are not to go out and reach out to others with the message of love? If you truly feel that is the spirit of our tradition, then I request you to demonstrate how this principle of our tradition was demonstrated in the life and teachings of Sri Chaitanya, and indeed of the Gosvamins or Narottama-Shrinivasa-Shyamananda.




Yes, I understand the point you wanted to demonstrate. However, sadly you chose a mistaken example to make your point. I recommend that you pay closer attention to picking examples, especially when it involves making public comments about others.

Madhava,

Sorry you seem to be so upset, kindly forgive me. Did your blessed Gurudev ask you to preach? If so, in what way?


I don't equate the two - its just that the two go together far too often with people who have IGM background example:
This site has a new member - listen to his bio-info: "I have been trying to chant the Holy Name of Krishna for 25 years but have not been able to get away from the platform of Namaparath. While residing in Vrindaban for two years my bhajan improved slightly but now I have been back to the West for ten years and I feel very covered by the material atmosphere. My desire is to go back to Vrindaban to get more inspiration so that I can have a greater impact in my preaching here in the West, I do understand the importance of preaching especially in USA, so that eventually the Holy Name will spread through eavery town and village, but have felt that by lack of association my bhakti is so dry lately."

The above is a perfect example of the programming that IGM does to its members - obviously nothing our tradition would encourage i.e. that a practioner would do Bhajan in order to preach. And that the person seems to look to 'preaching success' for inspiration to do practice. That would be considered ego-driven.



Who besides me?




Quite franklin - yes! Although you make it sound so bad - we do not go out and try to convert people, even with love. However, if you mean - share the Love with all those one comes into contact with - as a natural expression - then yes! we should share the love we feel. We affect people with our presence (in person or online, including websites), by our example as a person developed in Vaishanava qualities, not by our education, persuasiveness, or want for them to become a Vaishanava themselves, especially if they have never heard of what a Vaishanava is.

PEACE PEACE PEACE

Dear JD33ji,

Danadavtas. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I feel the need to respond to some of your statements which I feel should be addressed. Overall I think you are a very thoughtful person who falls into a trap that many fall into in regards to drawing an unnecessary parallels.

“It is a very interesting thing - we are trying to have you grasp the level of Vaishanava Aparadh excisting in IGM - it is to the degree that they should be 'not respected from afar', but rejected - and those influenced from them should seriously reflect how to take the above a bit more seriously and take some time to reflect on the attitudes, patterns of thought, etc that they have ingrained in them from that exposure. If Sri Ananta Das Pandit ji actually knew the type of serious aparadh AC and his disciples have done and do, he (I think) would actually suggest you reject it as well. But I would never bring that kind of horrible news to a Great Great Vaishanava like him. (for those of you who may not know - I have lived in Vraja many years before most of you ever heard of Sri Ananta das Babaji - and I have known him and many many other Great Babas while living the life of a Babaji in Radha Kund in the 70's and early 80's - I would visit him often for Vaishanava charan dust kripa while doing kund parikrama and sit at his afternoon readings (path) both in Radha-kund and Vrindaban. I am asking you to appreciate that this/my tradition is a wonderful tradition and has very little to do personally, with IGM. I want to make clear that all of you (Braja & Rasaraj, etc) who have dear friends from and still in IGM don't need to reject them - they are your friends! but to be careful to weed-out the negative patterns of thought and behavior and Bad karma from being involved with IGM. I am asking that we try not to become reactive to this, but instead try to understand it. Not to take all this personally, but more objectively as merely baggage to clean up - but baggage that is offensive (smells bad).”

What I don't think you or Nitai happen to get is we are trying our best to be careful to "weed-out the negative patterns of thought and behavior and bad karma" from being involved in IGM. However remember that aparadha isn't a patent or attribute held exclusive by IGM. So we want to weed out these attitudes and behaviors regardless of who is at fault and who it comes from.

You make the point the Ananta dasa Babji would ask one to reject IGM due to the things they have said and done. Do you think he would embrace and encourage what Nitai writes or, more importantly, how much he seems to think and talk about such distasteful subjects? I am not jumping on Nitai but simply saying that if you are going to apply logic apply it evenly and with consistency. I will venture to guess that he would want his followers to steer clear of all such nonsense as none of it will lead to radha-dasyam.

“”Braja: I look and think about what would interest your average person in bhakti. What would impress them so much that they'd become eager to learn about Chaitanya Mahaprabhu? Unfortunately this is a huge challenge. Who would be interested in entering such a fractious arena?” Kindly don't take this personally, but I wonder what is motivating you to 'preach' to begin with - let alone preach a tradition you are not even initiated in? wouldn't it be more effective to know about a tradition and have at least 10-15 years of practice in it before one 'shares' it with others? I aslo find it hard to believe that Madhava and others with hardly 3-4 years of overall 1/2 time practice also feel a 'need' to 'preach'. My tradition is not a 'preaching tradition'. We are a practicing tradition that is open for sincere people to come and practice as well. (For what I am saying I look to the 6 gosvamis and to Sri Ananta Das Pandit). None of these 7 people feel a need to preach and convert others for ego gratification....do they? am I wrong here? I wish that those of you who would benefit from waking up out of the IGM mentality would do so and do so quickly. Kindly do not take offence to this - try to understand it. Especially Braja - who has a developed ability to put himself in the shoes of others. ”

I find a few issues here. The first is that you basically align age and tenure with advancement and realization. Strange parallel as I doubt you would automatically bow your head and heed whatever is stated to you because someone has been around a bit longer.

Why 10-15 years? Because you have bypassed that particular milestone? Is there anything scriptural context which draws a line at 10 – 15 years verse 10 – 15 minutes? Or is it a matter of humility, advancement, realization, and service to Guru and the Vaisnavas that really is at the heart of the matter?

The next issue is why you equate Madhava and Braj and the “need to preach and convert others for ego gratification” and leave yourself out of the equation. Why is that? Are you free of such?

What I find to be the most comical is that both you and Nitai seem to be the ones to benefit the most from “waking up out of the IGM mentality”. If every mention of IGM ignites a fire in your heart then it is your issue. Try to understand that.

I think of the analogy of attachment where two monks cross the path of a woman at the bank of a river. Due to the Woman’s lack of strength the one Monk picks her up and carries her across the river and then continue to move on his way. Hours later his companion reveals his heart that he is disturbed that a Monk would carry a Woman across the river and his companion confirms that, yes indeed he carried her across the river, but that his dear friend has carried her ever since (in his mind and heart). This is something I think you should reflect on/

I will obviously believe you that Nitai is both great association and an advanced Vaisnava. However I will say that he does not seem detached from IGM in any way, shape or form. He still allows IGM, and everything he confesses to hate about them, in his heart and words.

Braja and Madhava may have “just left” IGM but in this case after 20+ years outside of IGM it would seem that Nitai has yet to let go. To give credit or have “respect from afar” is a much better than to carry that weight in ones heart and actions.

Whether you are speaking of advancement or detachment it isn’t a matter of years of practice or distance but of the heart, mind and actions.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Basically, in whichever way I deemed fit. He did not specify a particular medium or arena for it.



Doh -- that's hardly exclusive to IGM. I believe showing off with one's devotional feats, whether bhajan or prachar, is a rather common weed that needs to be uprooted. Some boast about their great bhajan or their great prachar, and others do more doing and less talking about themselves. That happens everywhere.



Where is the ego in there? If he does it to gratify himself or to become famous, then that would be ego-driven. I fail to see how there is anything inherently ego-driven in prachar.



Well, since I can count the Westerners who have been around for over a decade and are still around practically with one hand's fingers, and since Jagat, Nitai, Mina and Advaita seem fairly well grounded in Gaudiya scriptures, we would have to look at the Bengali population. Knowledge of Sanskrit or thorough studies of bhakti-granthas aren't all that common among them.



Well, that is what I've been talking about. Sharing of it. We commonly see the word prachar translated as preaching, particularly when used in the context of disseminating a religious message. In Caitanya Caritamrita alone, you'll find the expression literally dozens of times.


That's a little something from the first third of Adi-lila. So it certainly isn't an alien concept to our tradition to reach out with the treasure at our disposal. Of course, that isn't to say that it should run over our individual bhajana. Rather both nourish each other.

Exactly Rasaraj! I am very happy to be in dialogue with you - sincerely!

I agree with you here - I have been working on it and some of his site has changed - more may take time or he feels it is worthwhile somehow. I don't know what to say other than I do feel bad when I see it and do ask him about it actually asking him to take IGM stuff off his site, what to do?


Not any personal milestone: - 10-15 years is a good amount of time for experiencial maturity. When one has exceptional realization breakthrough - it takes 10-12 years to settle in. This is know to alot of heavy practioners. It is unsaid and not talked about. 10-15 minutes is usually realization on a mental level, which is usually not strong enough to gain wisdom - the real deep realization is beyond the mental. Yes - you are correct - it is a matter of Humility, et al! Rasaraj - I am so happy for you mentioning these things - sincerely.


Good try Buddy! ( ) Actually, I don't preach.


I hear you RR, I find you have a bit on this by your statement. I hardly ever think about the above, it is here that I have been reading and seeing it recently and am responding. I know nothing of GM - I am at a loss with GM and how it has affected people who have been through it - like Madhava. Except that recently I saw an old client who took inicitation from someone i believe is GM. She had tulsi-looking mala around her neck, japa beads, etc and was telling me that she met and took inciation recently from a Buddhists! And then tried hard to remember the 'Buddhist' mantra she was given, all she could remember is Hare & Krishna "or something". Iskon - I have enough knowledge and experience and stories to be concerned and respond.


I agree - and know the two monks storey - it is a good one!


Thats what it is - whatever way it is cut - it comes down to the above. What do we do through our heart, mind, and actions.

Sorry to leave things out. Regards, JD33

JD33-ji, I'm not sure why you are so intent on seeing IGM everywhere! Did I mention the word 'preach' anywhere? Didn't I speak of people, and primarily myself, as viewing Gaudiya Vaisnavism as a fractious mess? I spoke of people, primarily myself, wanting to take to it. I didn't speak of pulpits or street corners. I'm sorry but it really seems that you want to frame every discussion in terms of some supposed contamination of IGM regardless of what the person is actually saying.

I also find it fascinating that you take such a liberal view of your gurubhai's efforts--books, websites, organizations, debates (all activities that were ordered by Tin Kudi Goswami, I assume?)--and yet any other action along the same lines is somehow contaminated by IGM sympathies. Such a black-and-white world certainly makes things easier but is that fair?

The reasoning and evidence you offer for your opinions seems quite loose: Nitai knows the Path better than Jagat, but AFAIK you don't spend any time with Jagat; you say you don't know much about IGM but somehow you are dead certain about the extent of their offensiveness; you don't know most of us but you are again certain of the level of our IGM contamination; you have a client who mentions Buddhism, wears beads and knows "Hare Krsna" and that somehow convinces you that they took initiation in ISKCON; you see a few words in someone's bio or hear them tell a joke and that's enough to convince you that they haven't seen the light? I'm sorry but all that is just plain unreasonable and, in some cases, a tad impolite.

The empty characterizations and spurious accusations aren't going to get us anywhere. Barring people laying their initiation dates and lineages on the table--which doesn't seem to be enough unless they are a gurubhai or are, perhaps, residents of Sri Radha Kunda--what is going to convince you that any particular person isn't still holding on to aparadhas "caught" while associating with IGM? It sure seems like you are on a crusade but you are yet to express concrete reasons for that. What is it that you reject in IGM? Maybe if you voiced that clearly, you'd find that we are mostly in agreement. (And if not, isn't there some middle ground? Some grey area--or rainbow--where as human beings we can politely agree to disagree?)

Perhaps it is also not clear, but most of the audience here, myself included, would probably be fascinated to learn about your practices, your lineage, your experiences in Vraja and with your gurudeva, etc. I know you don't preach, but seeing as you are here, why not share something more that will inspire people? The lack of a directive to preach isn't the same as a directive to remain silent is it?

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I am glad we are in agreement that IGM doesn't have a monopoly on the aparadha market. Aparadha isn’t jut an act or a statement rather it is even contained within a thought. I am also glad that you are working with Nitai on cleaning up some of his material. It is a delicate thing as he shows some interesting history and material but at the same time tends to have the tone of someone in which you wouldn't ordinarily equate with the mood of an advanced sadhaka.

That doesn’t mean that an advanced sadhaka would not correct or address such mistakes or take someone to task for doing something which offends the Vaisnavas... it simply means that the manner in which they go about it and the way in which such an incident plays within the sum total of their devotional life and offering to the Vaisnavas would probably look much much different.

I found the following story interesting "Except that recently I saw an old client who took inicitation from someone i believe is GM. She had tulsi-looking mala around her neck, japa beads, etc and was telling me that she met and took inciation recently from a Buddhists! And then tried hard to remember the 'Buddhist' mantra she was given, all she could remember is Hare & Krishna "or something". Iskon - I have enough knowledge and experience and stories to be concerned and respond."

I can tell you about a few situations where I have also met someone initiated, but within a traditional line or even IGM and then a traditional line, who wasn't quiet up to par from what you would expect from someone with diksa.

I believe your point is to illustrate that there is a responsibility to ensure that a disciple is qualified to be such by ensuring basic knowledge and understanding and that to ignore such a responsibility is a sign of a problem. So again I want to remind you that if you want to use such an incident to illustrate a point please ensure that your standpoint is consistent with the illustration.

In regards to devotional maturity I just think you and I need to be VERY careful in how we asses someone’s qualifications. What you define as indicators of ones qualification is okay as long as you understand that it is extremely subjective in how it equates to reality. What would you say if you heard that someone met their Guru, took diksa and within months had disciples of their own? Would you say that one must be practicing their sadhana and taking close instruction for 10-15 years before such a scenario could even be spoken of or would you say that you can’t make an assumption on such a scenario?

Now I know you would, of course, take into consideration the individual, their spiritual experience as well as understanding that there is so much in regards to internal development and even past lives which set the table for such a scenerio. My point is that for you to say that Braja or Madhava's experience lacks enough depth to indeed "preach" is disturbing to me. Why?

Such a line of thinking and how it is approached was one of the first "cracks of faith" I had with ISKCON. There is a culture and mood that rules out individual experience. We are a theology of individuals with our own individual relationship with Sri Radhika and Yugala Kishor yet the individual experience is ignored and condemned. Yet this is a trap you seem to fall within when insisting that Braja and Madhava need to fit within a mold (i.e. 10-15 years equates to qualification to preach or instruct) for you to see it fit for them to assert a point.

You mentioned Srila Ananta dasa Babaji. Do you know his story? It doesn’t fit into that whole 10-15 year. In fact within months of meeting his Guru and practicing bhajana under his Guru’s guidance he was sent back to his village and ordered to be Guru. Of course such a scenario isn’t the norm but it does illustrate that one cannot judge a book by its cover or it’s date of being published !

Another thought that I would like to share is in regards to how we view and treat one another. I always found it part humorous and part devastating that people tend to overlook the greatness in one another. In terms of ISKCON there is a general pattern that one isn’t a saint until they are dead, if even then. Many of ACBSP’s disciples state that their Guru was the best Guru yet they say that none of their Godbrothers or Sister’s can be Guru. Makes me chuckle that the “greatest teacher” is said to have taught no one anything substantial! Especially when you consider that ACBSP himself stated that you judge a tree by it's fruits. So if the fruit is rotten...

Even more startling, for me, was how ACBSP viewed his Godbrother’s and how many of his Godbrother’s viewed one another. So the same thought above applies here. My point is that don’t underestimate anyone here because you aren't just judging them but their guardians.

We simply don’t know who we are talking to in the big scheme of things. As you stated your respect for Srila Ananta dasa Babaji you must also recognize that his blessing and instructions can make a lame soul a great one. We may indeed expect that one would spend many many years under the direction of their Guru and in the service of Guru and the Vaisnavas before they even experience a taste of their true self yet we also must recognize that the power of the holy name, ones diksa mantras and the wishes of the Vaisnavas can make moments equate to lifetimes of devotional service.

All in all I think the thread has played itself to a conclusion for me. I hope that my points did not and do not offend either yourself, Nitai or anyone else that has read what I have written. Unfortunately many times theories sound good until we apply them to our lives and the lives of our loved ones. Before we are critical of one another we should apply those same standards to ourselves and our loved ones which will generally bring about a powerful perspective.

All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Besides the differences of opinion about these topics, I would also like to state, as a 1/2 time moderator, that highlighting a member's bio in this manner isn't very considerate. Obviously things can get heated sometimes but we should always be aware that this a forum where anyone who agrees to the principles of this forum is welcome. The same point could have been made without potentially embarassing or disturbing one of the members.

Braja. (putting himself in someone else's shoes)

Yes, (as a second moderator) I second that, and I believe Jagat would agree as well. If it had been up to Malati (a fourth mod here), many posts in this thread would have already been scrapped. On second thought, maybe I ought to let her pull the chains more. People fill in their profiles in good faith, hoping that fellow members here would get a better idea of who they are and where they're coming from. I don't think anyone fills in their profiles expecting that people will quote out of them and make commentaries on them -- especially commentaries that aren't too flattering.

I just got off the phone with Nitai & JD33, and they directed me to this discussion. I have not yet gone through it all with a fine toothed comb, but from skimming pages 3 & 4, I think I get the gist of it.

Let me just interject here with some comments that were made at lunch today. I was meeting with a client who is very interested in Zen Buddhism and has been a vegetarian for many years now. The restaurant, BTW, is located a couple blocks away from the ISKCON temple. I noticed a familiar face across the room, which turned out to be that of actor/director Max Gail of Barney Miller fame ("Wojo"). I approached him for an autograph for the wife and he proceeded to graciously comply and began to interview us about our own lives and then started to explain his grassroots community activism (www.lap.org), which turned into an hour long conversation covering social interaction in today's society, the political landscape and last but not least, religous intolerance. At one point I commented out there is some interesting dialogue going on in cyberspace and how I think it needs to be taken offline at some point and the people involved finally meeting face to face, in order for it to move to the next level. My client then countered that there are some real possibilities for virtual meetings with what technology is capable of bringing us as soon as five years in the future. I think that is some food for thought for these types of incendiary exchanges in our own community (and how would we describe ourselves to the rest of the world? A ragtag collection of diverse Western mystics of the Gaudiya Vaishnava persuasion? A group of seekers that happened to cross paths by either mere chance or perhaps divine intervention? A cross generational international conglomerate of post-modern Hindu new age sects that have agendas that only slightly overlap?).

I think the most important theme of that extended discourse was the importance of community at the local level, irrespective of the nature of the social interaction, whether it be political, academic, athletic, religious, etc. I think it is far better that we have these discussions, even if they escalate into a tempest in a teapot on occasion, than the alternative: No interaction at all.

Something suddenly has dawned on me here. Have any of you {snip} even read the things on my website or any of my books? If you have, how can you say something like this?

Rasaraj: You make the point the Ananta dasa Babji would ask one to reject IGM due to the things they have said and done. Do you think he would embrace and encourage what Nitai writes or, more importantly, how much he seems to think and talk about such distasteful subjects? I am not jumping on Nitai but simply saying that if you are going to apply logic apply it evenly and with consistency. I will venture to guess that he would want his followers to steer clear of all such nonsense as none of it will lead to radha-dasyam.

95% of what is on my website has nothing to do with IGM. Nor is it repetitive, Rasaraj. My Book Garden is full with book postings in almost none of which have I said a word about IGM. I am quite proud of my website and I have received many good remarks concerning it. You guys are portraying me and my work in a completely unfair way and I do find it offensive. On the rare occasions when I do discuss IGM I rarely if at all cross the line into the territory of Vaisnava aparadha. When I discuss IGM my major focuses are:

1. The evident lack of authentic initiation which is an accepted fact in the mainstream Vaisnava communtiy.

2. The misinterpretation of the Rupa's BRS in which vaidhi bhakti is regarded as preparatory to raganuga bhakti (they are really two separate and distinct paths)

3. The existence of Vaisnava aparadha in Bhaktivedanta's and Sridhara's books and the influence of that on chanting the Holy Name

4. The lack of the institution of sannyasa in GV

5. The inappropriateness of and lack of need for the varnasrama dharma in GV

6. The mistaken idea in IGM that the guru must be perfect or pure or "realized" in GV

7. The mistranslation and therefore misunderstanding of the Namaparadha in IGM

None of this strikes me as Vaisnava aparadha? Where is my aparadha in this?

These are all aimed at setting the record straight.

Most of my work is directed towards editing and translating several ancient and modern works of the GV tradition. To listen to you {snip} one would think that all I do is bash IGM. Either demonstrate where I have been excessive in my criticisms of IGM or shut up about me!

[Harsh language was {snip}ped out by Malati.]

Dear Nitai das,

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I must have you all wrong but it is hard to understand you as a cultured, well mannered, evenly tempered Vaisnava with sample outbursts like the one above.

I can assure you that I have read through your Nitai Zine issues and your posts both here and on SCF although I admit to not having read your book. I trust that was enough of a sampling to get a jist of where you are coming from as an individual? The rest of your site and offerings are by other authors and are translations which are great contributions but don;t give as much insight to you as a person as your own writings should. As you see it fit to take a portion of ACBSP writings to prove your feelings on him as an individual I think you would see it appropriate that such can be done in understanding you?

Moreover I assume you are also calling your close friend JD33a a jackass? As a close friend he remarked “I agree with you here - I have been working on it and some of his site has changed - more may take time or he feels it is worthwhile somehow. I don't know what to say other than I do feel bad when I see it and do ask him about it actually asking him to take IGM stuff off his site, what to do?”

JD33 seems to share at least a bit of our concern. Maybe you could approach it from the angle that we all aren’t as clueless as you would like to make us out to be and try to take such concern in a way to further refine your presentation? As you seem to also believe many times perception is reality when it comes to writing about others.

You are the same Nitai that wrote in response to my initial mention of you? In that post Nitai said "I found your parody quite funny and of course truthful, since there is a bit of truth in every piece of humor. Yes, I have been quite repetitive and I deserve to have the hose turned on me. Still, in my defense, I have only wasted some electrons which are quite plentiful."?

As I clearly stated in my posts you do make some valid historical and philosophical points which I found to be very interesting. The problem is it is generally presented with the attitude and presentation style of an angry person who sounds much like those he claims to reject, pity and be above.

For someone who promises that there is much better out there in terms of what IGM has to offer... you know, a beautiful spiritual theology/culture, a door to the great gifts given to us by the great Vaisnava sadhakas which will truly satisfy ones soul… your attitude makes it sound like you missed your own boat. You sound like an angry and thoroughly bitter person who is more about what he experienced 27+ years ago then what he is today.

If you received more after you left IGM, which I would imagine you should have based on the beautiful homages to your Guruji, you seem to struggle to take advantage of it and allow it to define who and what you are. That is the goal of a disciple now isn’t it?

Maybe you could do us all a favor? How about you show us everything written or spoken by BSST, with specific references as opposed to "well one time he said", so we can review all of this aparadha? We can take a look at the actual statements, leave the feelings, interpretations and rumors aside and simply go from there. Once you have actually established all of that we could move onto ACBSP. At least tha would be a constructive look at this issue.

In the future I will leave any more mention of your name and writings off a public board as it puts you in an uncomfortable position. I apologize for that. I wish you well, I really do.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Dear respected Vaishnavas,

I beg my pardon for interrupting such elevated discussion. Then, once again, I beg my pardon for big citing of grantha without slightest understanding of it's meaning. And once again I beg my pardon (especially to Jagatji, because I know that he is working on translation of this grantha right now) for any mistranslations and misconceptions in this translation.

My only intention is to remind these nectarean instructions to all assembled devotees.

Sadhu ninda, or criticism of Vaishnavas, is the first of the ten offenses against the Holy Name. The word ninda means animosity or malice. If by chance this offense occurs, the person should repent, “Oh, I am such a low class person, I have committed an offense to a saintly person!” A person who has been burned by fire seeks relief in fire. According to this logic, he should nullify the offense by lamenting, resolving to come before the Vaishnava, falling at his feet, and satisfying him by offering his obeisances, praises and respects.
If the Vaishnava is not satisfied, the person should render favorable services to him according to his desires for many days. Sometimes the offense is so grievous that the Vaishnava's anger does not die. In extreme remorse, thinking himself most unfortunate and bound for millions of years in hell for his offense, he should give up everything and take full shelter of continuous nama sankirtana. By the divine power of nama kirtana, certainly, in time that person will be delivered from his offense.

However, he should not justify himself by arguing that shastra says, namaparadhayuktanam namanyeva harantyagham: The Holy Name alone is sufficient to deliver an offender. So what is the need of humbling himself by offering repeated respects and service to the Vaishnava that he has offended? This type of mentality makes him guilty of further offense. Nor should one be of the mentality to think that the offense of sadhu ninda discriminates between types of Vaishnavas.

It does not refer only to one who is fully and perfectly qualified with all the qualities mentioned in scripture, such as mercifulness, never harming others, and forgiving to all living entities: krpalur akrta-drohas titiksuh sarva dehinam (SB 11.11.29). A person cannot minimize his offense by pointing out some defect in the devotee. In answer the scriptures say: sarvacara vivarjitah sathadhiyo bratya jagadvancakah, even a person who is of very bad character a cheater, devoid of proper behavior, malicious, devoid of samskaras, and full of worldly desires, if he surrenders to the Lord, must be considered a sadhu. What to speak of a pure Vaishnava.

Sometimes a serious offense has been committed against a Vaishnava, but the Vaishnava does not become angry because of his exalted nature. Still the offender should fall at that devotee's feet and seek ways of pleasing him to purify himself. Though the Vaishnava may forgive offenses, the dust of his feet does not tolerate the offenses and delivers the fruits of the offense on the guilty person. For it is said:

sersyam mahapurusa-pada-pamsubhir
nirasta-tejahsu tad eva sobhanam

(Madhurya Kadambini)

Dear Rasaraj,

Sorry to disappoint you. Yes, I did initially agree to your parody until I realized what you were really talking about. I thought you were talking about my various posts here and at SCF. I gradually came to realize that what you meant, though, was my books, my website, my articles and essays, in short, my whole life's work up to this point. You were representing it all as a boil on the {snip} of Caitanya Vaisnavism. That got me {snipity-snip-snip} mad. It still steams me, because it is now clear that you have read almost nothing of it. And yet you feel qualified to comment on it. And I thought you were intelligent and even-handed. Boy was I wrong.

When I called you a {snip} I also had Braja in mind and yes even JD33. He has not read my site either. He claims to be trying to get me to change my website, but he doesn't even know what is there. He was put off by my inclusion on the Saints page of pictures and links of the likes of Narayana Maharaja and Sridhar Maharaj. In that version of that page I took a mild mostly hands off approach towards them. JD33 didn't like that. I too came to feel that it was not appropriate because those two and their followers had committed much aparadha of our gurus. Thus, I have settled on the current version of the page in which they are recognized but with the caveat that they are viewed in the mainstream tradition as apa-parampara. That is the position I am most comfortable with aat present.

So you want me to go through BSST and cite all of the passages where he commits Vaisnava aparadha. I guess that is because the passages of Vaisnava aparadha are too well known and attested in Bhaktivedanta, Narayana Maharaj and Sridhar. Yes, I may just do that. I have many of his works in Bengali and English. Keep an eye out.

Let's have a look at the original content you've been providing on the website. Perhaps that will help us get an idea of why people might see you and your site in such a light. After all, original content -- not the translations -- are the ones that tell most about who you are and what you think.

Let's start with the Nitai-zines. An overview of the contents at a quick glance.

• First issue - Discussion on initiation, Bhaktisiddhanta's lack of initiation, ISKCON and Tripurari Swami's booklet.
• Second issue - Reviewing the ways in which ISKCON is not successful, and therefore must not have proper initiation. ISKCON's lack of empowerment.
• Third issue - Why I left ISKCON. The various flaws and offences of ISKCON.
• Fourth issue - Discussion on Tripurari Swami's booklet, why I left ISKCON, and the heresy of siksa-parampara.
• Fifth issue - Discussion on the ass-backwardness of the ISKCON approach. On eligibility for smarana and related IGM heresy. Origins of siddha-pranali.
• Sixth issue - Review of the fallacies of IGM's siksa-parampara doctrine. Sannyasa in Gaudiya Vaishnavism (transl.). Excerpt from Krishnahnika-kaumudi (transl.) Correspondence related with IGM-topics of earlier zines.
• Seventh issue - My departure from ISKCON. Guest article containing varieties of critique on IGM philosophy and practice. GV and sannyasa (transl.). Some vaishnava songs (transl.) with introduction. Correspondence on earlier IGM-issues in the zines.
• Eighth issue - My departure from ISKCON. Kapoor and Nitai-Gaura-Radhe-Syama. Guest essay from a former ISKCON member who saw the light and moved on. Guest essay - memories of Madrasi Baba. Some translations.

Aside that, there are Essays, Responses, and Readings:

• Development of monotheism in Vaishnava-tradition, abbreviated and original versions of the essay.
• Part one of my reflections on ISKCON - ISKCON's Shallow Pond. (Upcoming: ISKCON's Dirty Pond.)
• Response to a question about OBL Kapoor. On lack of diksa in IGM.
• Collected letters, roughly half of them concerned with IGM.

Then, there are short introductions to some translations. Yes, and Gallery of Great Vaishnavas, which first presents a series of traditional Gaudiyas and then contrasts it with an equal dose of IGM people with a lengthy introduction on why they are not authentic. Then there is your bio and your favorite music.

That's all the original content I can find. Honestly, the emphasis seems to have tipped a bit off balance. With a person of your background, one would expect to see heaps of insightful essays into the real topics we all are eager to read about, namely presentations of various core issues and nuances of our theology and practice -- without being persistently contrasted with how a certain fringe group is doing it wrong. It does not reflect favorably on you to see the extent to which the original content you provide is concerned with IGM.

And don't take me wrong, it is great that you present various translations on your website. However the often virulent and persistent emphasis on IGM in all original content tends to put people off as far as your good self is concerned.

Dear Nitai dasa,

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

You don't need to worry about disappointing me. I am also sorry that you are disappointed with me and find me not to be even handed. Like I said I can't claim to have read everything you have ever written. My feelings were indeed a by-product of reading all of your Nitai Zines, posts in SCF/GD as well as the letter's section of your website and various other articles contained there. If that is indeed next to nothing then I apologize.

It may just be that I am somehow unfortunate enough that I happen to point and click on articles and writings where you just so happen to be addressing IGM and your feelings on their organizations and followers while missing almost everything else. Seems to happen to me often. At work when I do my audits I always happen to find the project with quality issues. My Manager's think I have some kind of inner guide which leads me to picking those particular projects out of the other hundreds of possible projects I could have sampled.

In the case of your website I just found that your assesment that 95% is about anything other than IGM to be a bit strange. For my own sanity I visited your site again after reading your post and I am not sure if I am either missing something because it seems that the vast majority of what you wrote is about IGM.

Overall I don't claim to be an expert on all things Nitai das so again I apologize if I have cast you in the wrong light. I can only speak of the experiences I have encountered while reading your writing and like I said in my last post I will not comment on you or your writings in a public forum anymore since I seem to be the one who is missing the boat on what you are actually saying.

I am also not asking you to " go through BSST and cite all of the passages where he commits Vaisnava aparadha". What I was asking is that if we are going to talk about the subject matter let's let these individuals documented words drive the conversation as opposed to what someone heard and told someone else which spoke to their Sister's Mother's best friend who relayed it to their brother. Of course we also can't simply isolate a sentence here or there to drive a point as we need to be aware of context.

Again I wish you well.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

In all of my original stuff? The monotheism papers barely mention it. You forgot the essay on Nama Theology in the Nama section and none of the introductory essays in the Vedanta book or the Sanatana book mention it. Apart from that the new Nitai-zine in preparation has hardly anything to say about IGM. As far as my not producing interesting essays on subtle points of the philsophy and practice, I, unlike many others in this forum, think that one should really know something before writing that sort of stuff. A quick read of what is available and some matching word searches does not count as mastery of a topic.

If my writings in the Nitai-zine seem unusually shaped by my IGM experience it is because that was my starting point. I used that forum as a place in which I could straighten out the misinformation I had accumulated in IGM, the types of things I mentioned in a previous posting. I am really moving away from a meditation shaped by my past IGM samskaras to a meditation free of those. My last Nitai-zine came out over two years ago.

Kind of hard to wade thru all this in a short time for me, but I am a bit astonished how now the fire has turned on Nitai. I think we all should remember what he stands for for the rest of us. He is - in political terms - collateral damage of "the totalitarian war against Maya" (BSST's words according to Sridhar Maharaja). Please, also see what he has suffered in such close proximity to the self-proclaimed super-guru that was AC, the kind of surrender to nonsense that was demanded explicitly and implicitey by him and his entourage, that culture of denial that a fascistoid guru-cult imposed minute by minute. Sorry, I really understand too well what it means to be exposed to such garbled half-truths, lies and mis/representations, and the manipulations involved.

In addition, let me say that Nitai's voicing of his experiences is a necessary part in the whole of our different types of exposures of the non-culture of IGM. It may be most unpleasant, but it is necessary to show to the world of would-be vaishnavas what horrors have been caused, what wounds are to be healed. The first step is to recognize and to expose. And if Nitai is doing that for us, since he has stood in the line of fire (as the secretary of Mr. AC, and designated black snake), he does a great service to the collective of us who desire to reach different levels of realization.

I see also what RR and others are pointing out, but let us see that each of us is a different shade of color in the whole picture.

Thanks for your kind attempt to enlighten us, Kalki. Sadhu-ninda does not mean criticism of Vaisnavas, however. Sadhu, for one thing, means holy person or good person and thus is much broader than Vaisnava. it extends even to yogis and Saivites and Saktos. Ninda does not mean criticism, it means calumny or saying things about a person that are not true. Criticism is acceptable; malicious intent is not. I have no malicious intent towards BSST, Bhaktivedanta, Narayana M., Srkidhar M., or any of their followers. That does not mean that I am not critical of them. I find many of their statements misleading and not representative of the actual teachings of Sri Caitanya and the Goswamis. I also find many of them offensive in that they have said things about good people that really aren't true. That is the reason I criticize them. As for the members of this forum, Rasaraj, Madhava, Braja, and JD33, they are probably not {snip}-s or {snip}-s, at least not all of the time. They are probably more like {snip}-s than anything. Or, perhaps they are really {snip}-s. And I did have a malicious intent when I called them {snip}-s. So, I am probably really guilty of aparadha in their cases. I sincerely apologize to them.

Hahahahaha

Moved this thread aside due to concerns from some members who were pretty disenchanted by its contents.

Quite amusingly, I posted quotation from MK in attempt to pacify everybody and with hidden intent to support Nitaidasji. I did it in such impersonal way, because I have equal respect to both sides of discussion - both to Nitaiji and to Rasarajaji and Madhavanandaji (I don't know JD33ji, but still have respect to him, for he is senior Vaishnava). But Nitai preferred to see my posting as directed against him... Maybe, he feels himself guilty to some extent?

I just got online and want to thank RasaRaj and Braja for their imput and response to me. I have had quite a nice time of introspection on this topic last night and this morning and some rather nice purging effects and again thank you all - now I will read through the quite a bit of response that has been added.

ay-ya-yai!

I think we should all just cut our losses.

Kalkidasji,
Kindly understand that Nitai dasji was just correcting and elucidating on the quote - it wouldn't be any fault of yours that it was mis-translated to begin with. Kindly be patient with this process - it can be rewarding to see how we respond to what is going on here and how things can become clarified for us - like ghee, etc. Keep the faith.

1). I think overall we have to see the difference between criticism and ninda/aparadh. And try not to take things personally (yikes! sometimes it is hard to do I know).
2). To see where we ourselves have 'stuff' within us that is nothing more than ego-protection ( and yet how fastly we cling to it sometimes - ugh - this world sometimes - really!).
3). And btw [snip] {snip} {snippity snip} - well you know what I mean! [Love God] {Praise God} {Love loving God}.
4). kindly excuse me for being so smug and self-righteous at times - sincerely.

OK, now we are getting somewhere. More frank discussion of what's really on our minds is sorely needed, not only within our little cyber community, but in society at large.

This whole concept of political correctness, as lofty an ideal as it may appear to be, tends to leave much to be desired, for in the process of destigmatizing much that is ostensibly innocent it ultimately renders the outlet of constructive criticism impotent. Without critics, there would be no critiques, and without critiques there is little chance for self improvement, IMO.

I am all for refraining from speech that causes emotional distress, especially when the motives are those of domination over those who are weaker than oneself. The criticism that comes from one's social superiors is a blessing, even if one is unable to recognize it as such. Still, it must be administered with tact, lest the chastisee become blinded to the benefits by emotional turmoil. It is altogether possible to calmly and collectedly criticize without a caustic tone.

Personally, I think Nitai has been misjudged by many people who have encountered his writings but who do not know him personally. I recommend looking below the surface and assessing someone's character based on direct observation rather than wholesale rushing to judgment and condemnation out of hand. I know this well, having been often misjudged myself on account of my extremly dry wit.

Can nothing be added here? Does everyone not have access here? It seems to me that having a zone where troublesome topics go may not be such a bad idea. But by all means, let the discussion go on.

I personally see that there are many individuals who are deeply troubled and offended by what goes on in the name of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in the West. This latest letter by Rambhoru only serves to illustrate how alienated many of us are from their values.

Those of us who are here can be divided roughly into two groups--those who still see some merit in IGM and those who see none. I myself see the principal merit of IGM that it, at present, continues to be the main source of people interested in Chaitanya Vaishnavism. This is an unfortunate conundrum, but until we find ways of attracting people to Mahaprabhu entirely independently of IGM, we must recognize that through all the haze of their cultural distortions, they remain a principal point of contact between the world and Mahaprabhu.

This does not mean we have to like them. But we should still exercise the minimum care. Vaishnava aparadha is rather far-reaching, I am afraid.

Take the attitude of one who respects women and so treats even a prostitute with the honor he would give his mother.

Everyone who likes can read and comment. This section is off limits for everyone who hasn't requested for access, a place where you come at your own risk. Generally those who make major contributions to threads that move here are automatically added.

I haven't read through the thread, but I'll try to do so to see what all the fuss is about.

Just a couple of comments on this thread:

1) Complaining about the repetitive nature of ACBS' purports seems a bit out of place coming from any Gaudiya Vaishnava. Repition is found throughout the Gaudiya literatures. Why pick out ACBS and complain about it only in the books he published? what about Krsna dasa kaviraja? shall we forgive him for repeating himself? That whole line of critique simply smells of sour grapes to me.

2) According to Lord Chaitanya himself one cannot spread the glories of the Holy Name without being empowered to do so. So the real question for any serious practicioner of Gaudiya Vaishnavsim as it pertains to the life and work of ACBS is 'why was he so successful and why do his books continue to inspire people throughout the world to take up devotional life and practice nama bhajana?'

3) Time, place and circumstance do change and therefore the best method of engaging people in devotional service will have to be adjusted accordingly. Why complain about that? If someone has the time and the inclination they can certainly live an ascetic life, but most people in today's world have to work more hours and lead much more complicated lifes that people did 500 years ago. Lord Chaitanya is spreading his message and glories to everyone and giving everyone an opportunity to participate according to their capacity and inclination. We are all individuals and the practices will be adopted by each of us according to our own interest, capacity, time etc.

4) The whole point of preaching is to package the message in such a way that people actually get inspired to action. Adjusting the presentation of Gaudiya Vaishnavism to spread it world wide is a monumental accomplishment - something that could have never been done without considering the culture and audience.

5) I think it is a very realistic expectation that if devotees here want to be taken seriously and their critique of others to have any credibility then they will have to exhibit in their speech and in their actions that the teaching they have adopted that they feel is 'better', 'truer', 'purer' or any other adjective you wish to place on them - is actually yielding desirable fruits of the spirit.

6) People followed ACBS and continue to follow him because they saw in him that which they sought after - love for Krsna. It is very tangible and real. I follow my Guru Maharaja for the same reason.

I still don't understand the psychology behind trying to demonize someone you don't agree with. Move on already. For whatever reason many devotees here left Iskcon or GM and found shelter elsewhere. You have your reasons for doing so, but the fact that others don't follow the same path doesn't make them 'ignorant, offensive, cultish, etc - whaterver descriptor you want to place on them to validate your own choices. I asked my Guru Maharaja about why some devotees who in my own assessment are very advanced stay in Iskcon given all the obvious problems and he basically said each person follows their own heart. Why did Bishma fight on the side of the Kurus? Still, even though from one perspective he was 'on the wrong side', he is a great devotee.

If moving on from Iskcon, GM etc. has helped you in your devotional life and you are more enthusiastic to hear and chant about krsna now - who can argue with that? That is best for you. But if leaving has only resulted in bitterness and excuses for living a less than ideal life - then.......

For me, I can go one hearing about Krsna over and over again - yes it is very repetitive - but the wonder of it all is that it is always fresh and new!

Gaura Hari Bol!

Your servant,
Audarya-lila dasa

You see, maturity is not the monopoly of any sampradaya.

This is such an unkind thing to say. And this from a senior practicioner, someone who we are supposed to trust and look up to for shelter and guidance. I guess the guru-babysitting will continue for awhile...

Let's look at that passage again:


And elaborated on it as follows:


Out of sheer curiosity, I checked out Sri Ananta Dasji's edition, on which both Dinabandhu's and Advaitadasa's translations are based on, and indeed in both the "or criticism of Vaishnavas" was found, though the original Bengali anuvada merely notes sat vA sAdhuvyaktigaNer nindA.... (Jagat, please check this in the text you're editing.)

I am delighted to see that this courtesy is thus extended beyond the scope of Vaishnavas to holy men of all varieties. However, the interpretation of it specifically in the scope of Vaishnavism, especially when talking of sAdhu-nindA in the context of the ten nAmAparAdhas, is not all that much out of place (as you'll see Sri Jiva quote in a moment). You'll find Visvanatha himself specify the sAdhu as one who engages in bhagavat-bhajana later on in the chapter. As far as what exacty is ninda:


In the 265th anuccheda of his Bhakti-sandarbha, in explaining the ten offences against the holy name, Sri Jiva quotes a verse from the Skanda Purana, delineating varieties of unbefitting acts in relation with a Vaishnava.




While ninda, or blasphemy (correct -- not mere criticism), is given as one among the six, Sri Jiva also collectively places all the six under the general heading of ninda in interpreting the second nAmAparAdha.

There is an old topic in which we began a discussion of the abovequoted passage, but which unfortunately did not go into great detail over it. I believe we should resurrect it, and have a deep look at the whole affair once again.

In this vein, I would like to remind that this certainly also extends to holy men of ISKCON and Gaudiya Math, even if you do not consider them Vaishnavas due to not being viSNu-mantra-dIkSita proper in your view. The only way around to gain an exceptional license would be to declare them unholy, deprived of any sincerity in the matter of spirituality (and no, I am not saying just Krishna-bhakti, as this courtesy was just extended to Shaivaites, Shaktas and varieties of yogis). That, I believe (hope), is not something anyone in his right frame of mind would propose.

In this vein, I recall an incident related to the closing down of the old Raganuga-forums. As you know, Raganuga.Com is a website which, although not officially representing anyone, features much content from Sri Ananta Das Babaji. At times, there would be rather heated debates over various IGM issues between visiting IGM guests and the regulars onboard. The word eventually reached Baba -- although I suspect someone grandly exaggerated the scenario -- who became concerned over the matter and issued a request to close them down, as he would not like to have any such thing connected with himself. His concern was that people might make aparadha and ruin their spiritual lives.

As most of you know, we ended up closing the forums there, but as the idea itself of a pan-Gaudiya (trad.) forum was too valuable to do away with, we founded Gaudiya Discussions on neutral soil and also tightened our standards of moderation somewhat. Though the moderators here cannot micro-manage every discussion, I like to think we have managed to weed out at least the worst of it and keep the forum favorable for the bhajan of most, if not all, regular readers. Give or take some lapses, but for the most part anyway.

Never mind all this threat of hell treatment, what can be worse than being separated from the vaishnavas themselves?

I apologize for the word "all" there, it's a bit redundant considering what I wanted to say. What I am saying is that in [all] the original content we read from you, there is often a lot of talk about IGM. I noticed the essay on nama-tattva earlier, though it seems to have escaped me when I put that list together.

At any rate, I trust I made my point that for the occasional visitor who comes in and looks what Nitai Das has to say himself, aside those translations, then the chances of his hitting a page with IGM-bashing to one extent or another are pretty good. The fact that so many people have gotten such an impression of you in such a way should serve to prove the point.

Perhaps you could consider doing what we did a good while ago, when GD was in a state where IGM seemed to creep in in every other topic. We isolated the issue to a single subforum somewhere in the nether regions of the forums and contained all IGM-related topics there, keeping the rest free of it, whether portrayed in positive or in negative light. Personally whenever I look for my fresh breath of bhakti-air, I do not much care to read of them portrayed in any light at all, and when I feel like reading about them I'll go and find some. You might consider containing all IGM-related content in a similar way into a single section of your website, keeping the rest reserved for totally IGM-free presentations.

I think you need a PR agent.



While I agree with the sentiment there, I believe many are going by the logic of blind uncle versus no uncle. We make the best out of what we have. This is pretty much parallel to the recent guru-discussion. Though ideally only a person who has mastered the art of smarana and so forth should act as a guru, a lesser person may also act as a guru if the necessity arises. If memory serves, you were among the persons who advocated the latter view. It isn't that different in any other realm. As my Baba once put it (with regards to the guru-topic), "Something is better than nothing." Of course, if someone's writings are entirely misleading, then it's time to sit back and shut up. However I do not think that for example my writings, such as the stuff you can read at Raganuga.Org, is entirely misleading, though certainly not as eloquent as what someone who has fully mastered the topic might produce.

Students also write essays, last I checked, as a part of their process of learning. While not the equivalent of the professor's essay or the textbook, they may certainly prove useful for others.