Whatever is left over from the archives of the old Raganuga.Com forums after most of the substantial threads were moved to the relevant areas of the main forums.
general questions - general questions
Ananda - Fri, 29 Aug 2003 03:46:00 +0530
Dear Madhava,
I may be messing with a hornet's nest putting these questions here; you don't know me and I don't know you except that I have been reading some of your responses to questions on this site. It seems you are looked up as a pandit or scholar of some sort. I am sure I am not entirely wrong if I say that you shape many a searcher's opinion. Anyway, I have a couple of questions that are not necessarily technical or phylosophycal but that are pressing for me to move on. I have seen you critiquing Iskcon translations, practices, methods and more. I have seen you doing the same in relation to Gaudiya Math. By "Iskcon" or/and "Gaudiya Math, what exactly you imply, I don't know so I like to inquire what is your source authority to point out defects, shortcomings or deviations (whatever you would call them) in these two institutions? Personally I find it hard to dismiss personalities such as... well, the main spiritual leaders of those institutions through history, in favor of your personal opinion (if that is the case). So who, or what is your authority? "Who do you love"?
Wish me luck,
Ananda
Madhava - Fri, 29 Aug 2003 20:13:27 +0530
Dear Ananda,
Welcome to the hornet's nest. I sure hope nobody is looking up to me as something, since there are many considerably more evolved individuals in the assembly here, though sometimes not as active in participating.
I have been an active member of both ISKCON and a branch of Gaudiya Math for several years, hearing their lectures, studying their literature, preaching their message, doing what they do, so I have acquired significant first hand experience with them.
However, I am not inclined to critique anything or anyone merely based on their affiliation. Rather, everything should be examined on their own merit. Whether a practice, a translation or an opinion, it ought to be given an individual examination, not labeling it by it's association alone. If there is anything in particular you'd like to ask about in this regard, feel free to do it at any time in the course of our discussions. After all, what's an opinion worth if there is no basis to it?
Who, or what is my authority? I'm certain the concept of guru-sadhu-sastra is not unfamiliar to you. Guru - I am a disciple of Pandit Sri Ananta Das Babaji. Sadhu - The lives and teachings of the perfected saints are a vivid illustration of a good way to go. Sastra - The Bhagavata, the writings of the Gosvamis and their followers are the basis. Whenever we examine a contemporary religious matter, we reflect on these three to reach a conclusion. Of course, in discussions where different gurus may be represented, we mainly go by the common denominators, sadhu and sastra.
Take care,
Madhavananda
Radhapada - Sat, 30 Aug 2003 22:56:26 +0530
Dear Ananda:
Welcome to the hornet's nest of previous misconceptions about the Gaudiya Vaisnava teachings and practices presented by the western world's most notable Krishna devotional institutions, Gaudiya Matha and ISKCON. Although GM, and even more so, ISKCON, have some credit for the spreading of the teachings of Gita and Bhagavata, chanting of the holy names of Krishna, ect., there are some very essential differences regarding their teachings and practices with the rest of the religious tradition of the followers of the original Vrndavan Goswamis, like Sri Rupa and Sri Raghunatha. Madhava is not 'assuming' the role of a self-proclamied acarya or pandit, he is simply doing the seva of presenting the teachings with the help of other bhajananandi Vaisnavas around the world who have been practicing the religious bhakti tradition of the Goswamis. He is initiated within the Gaudiya Vaisnana pranali line of Sri Nityananda Prabhu, has studied the teachings of the Goswamis, as well as the teachings of the institutions of GM/ISKCON very thoroughly, has been through their religious practices (as many of us have) and as a result, has a great deal of experience, knowledge and advice to offer. His critiquing ISKCON and Gaudiya Math may seem quite self-assuming, but that is because of the Dr. Frog consciousness that many of us have fallen into, ie. "Are there genuine followers of Sri Caitanya outside of GM/ISKCON? Is it bigger than my (well) movement?"
Madhava - Sat, 30 Aug 2003 23:03:45 +0530
... rrribit rrribit! ...
Ananda? - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 03:22:18 +0530
Radhapada,
Isn't the result of Madhavananda's personal experience yet another institution (pond, well, movement)?
Ananda
Madhava - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 03:37:29 +0530
QUOTE(Ananda? @ Aug 30 2003, 09:52 PM)
Isn't the result of Madhavananda's personal experience yet another institution (pond, well, movement)?
I beg you a pardon? An individual certainly doesn't make an institution or a movement. As for a pond or well, well, you are free to assess the degree to which my views are subjective or objective. As I said, I am open for feedback and challenges, provided they are motivated with a desire to understand rather than a desire to challenge.
Radhapada - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 09:00:12 +0530
As far as I know, Madhava is not a member of an institution, nor am I. Factually speaking, the senior members of this website are not members of an institution either. Most of us are practioners of the preinstitutionalized Sri Caitanya tradition, that is, initiated in pranali lines descending from the branches of the Caitanya tree of Sri Nityananda, Sri Adwaita, Narottama Thakur Mahasaya, ect.
What I meant to say earlier is that the majority of people in the western world who have come in contact with bhakti teachings have been through the institutions of GM/ISKCON. However, I personally don't share the opinion of these insitutions that their presentations of the bhakti teachings are all purely of the Sri Caitanya tradition. And, the reason I don't concur with all their teachings is because some of the concepts and practices differ with the Vrndaban Goswami teachings, especially dealing with Sri Radha-Krsna bhajan and raganuga bhakti.
Such a statement may sound very strong to someone who was brought up in the institutions of ISKCON/GM. That's why you compared it nicely with a hornet's nest. Yes, it stings a bit when something we were taught wasn't quite right after all.
As Madhava has mentioned previously, if you have some doubt, confussion, or some challenge you are welcome to present them here. If taken in a sincere way, the sanga here can help you 'move on' to the treasure house of Sri Radha's lotus feet.
Ananda - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 21:09:23 +0530
Madhavananda and Radhapada,
I don't know if you would like to continue replying to my messages here, but before I am politely sent away, I want to apologize if I am irritating you with the said messages. It seems there is a bit of stuff you are assuming about me such as that I am affiliated to those two institutions, and that I am challanging. I need to let you know that at this point in my life I am not affiliated to any "institution" really, and as for challenging, well, I would have to know what to challenge excactly and the truth is I am not so sure what you guys are about (as I said in my first letter, I don't know you just as you don't know me). On my side I am assuming, by the few things I have read in this site, that you positively do not aprove of Iskcon and Guadyia Math teachings and propaganda. So conclusively it seems to me that you are saying these two institutions are bogus and you can help clarify who is really representing and delivering Lord Caitanya's movement proper. My position is that I feel I need to proceed with caution for reasons that I would expect are obvious to you two. I am not challenging but I cannot help to highly question a few things.
Yes, I think that if you look into it deeply you will find that an individual can make an institution and/or a movement of his own. Even if that individual will be its only member. But I don't believe Madhavananda is in this entirely alone.
Actually by "hornet's nest" I meant the sensitivities of individuals who (again) I don't know personally. Other places we all know are stinging and can hurt, but we don't bother to mess with those anymore, do we? There is no chance of nectar there as we found out the hard way. I think what I am saying is that we should not become the biting party ourselves now...
Ananda
Radhapada - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:21:35 +0530
I personally don't have anything against institutions, I think they are facilitating in many ways. If there are positive ojectives to be obtained and the infrastructure is monitored properly then they can be, as I mentioned above, to be quite facilitating. I also personally don't consider ISKCON or Gaudiya Math to be a bogus religion either. I just know that SOME of their teachings (not all) are not what the Gowamis have preached, that's all. I also have my serious doubts, or convictions about the lack of a diksa lineage in these institutions.
As far as one person, or two, or more people making up a movement--I don't understand what troubles you in this regard, or what relevance it has for you. Feel free to express your mind as to make yourself clear.
I gather you are cautious about creating a hostile environment with your inquiries. I think most of us are not 'red hatted'. At least the senior members here tend to analyze things 'white hatted' with backings from the words of sastras and mahajans.
QUOTE
I don't know if you would like to continue replying to my messages here, but before I am politely sent away, I want to apologize if I am irritating you with the said messages.
I'm sorry you got this impression. And whether you belong to a religious institution, or not is irrelevent. I am sure you are well aware that such designations are external.
I believe your question is a sincere one. I think you want to know what gives the members, like Madhava, the right to claim that his presentation of the teachings of Sri Caitanya Vaisnavism is superior to the ones presented by those who have introduced the concepts here in the west in the first place? This may appear to you to be someone who has broken off from these institutions and has founded his own matha on the web, is that correct?
I personally think that in the last year and a half or so of his putting out this website, that he has done an excellent job of presenting to the best of his knowledge the Goswami siddhanta on Sri Radha-Krsna bhakti. The input from the senior members here has been phenomenal. I can give testament, as well as many other newcomers here, that if it wasn't for this website, we would be surely be lacking in understanding of what is proper Sri Radha-Krsna bhajan and the Gaudiya Vaisnava tradition. Isn't that so guys?
You see!
Madhava - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 23:23:12 +0530
QUOTE
I don't know if you would like to continue replying to my messages here, but before I am politely sent away, I want to apologize if I am irritating you with the said messages.
I wouldn't send you away, politely or otherwise. I hope our postings haven't given the idea that your presence wouldn't be welcome.
QUOTE
On my side I am assuming, by the few things I have read in this site, that you positively do not aprove of Iskcon and Guadyia Math teachings and propaganda. So conclusively it seems to me that you are saying these two institutions are bogus and you can help clarify who is really representing and delivering Lord Caitanya's movement proper. My position is that I feel I need to proceed with caution for reasons that I would expect are obvious to you two. I am not challenging but I cannot help to highly question a few things.
You are certainly welcome to question, even if highly. When I speak of challenging attitude, I mean an attitude of blind defense. It is impossible to enter into a dialogue over any given subject matter with a person who blindly defends his own cause. However, I am not under the impression that you would be such a person.
As for the "really representing" vs. "bogus", I wouldn't make it that black and white. Rather, talk about shades of gray. There's plenty of them in between.
QUOTE
Yes, I think that if you look into it deeply you will find that an individual can make an institution and/or a movement of his own. Even if that individual will be its only member. But I don't believe Madhavananda is in this entirely alone.
An individual can start a movement or an institution, certainly, but movements and institutions by definition indicate a collective of people with similar inclinations. Perhaps you would like to explain your choice of words to demonstrate the intended meaning of the words.
Yes, I am certainly not alone in many of the things I believe in. However, there is no strictly defined institution as the binding factor among most of us here, such as may be seen for example in ISKCON/GM and many of the other more organized forms of religion out there.
QUOTE
Actually by "hornet's nest" I meant the sensitivities of individuals who (again) I don't know personally. Other places we all know are stinging and can hurt, but we don't bother to mess with those anymore, do we? There is no chance of nectar there as we found out the hard way. I think what I am saying is that we should not become the biting party ourselves now...
I don't know if you've noted, but I tend to comment on ISKCON/GM only when the matter is brought up by someone else. Otherwise, I have plenty of more interesting topics to discuss. What I mean to say that most of the folks here are not obsessed with their past affiliations.
Madhava - Sun, 31 Aug 2003 23:25:47 +0530
Institutions are a means to an end, and organization is required in any endeavor. It becomes problematic when the establishment becomes the end and its function as a means is forgotten.
Mina - Mon, 01 Sep 2003 00:19:01 +0530
Ananda Ji is indeed a welcome participant in these discussions. In fact, the schism topic from which this thread was split off was created specifically for people such as him.
With respect to the two institutions he has referred to, the burden of proof is actually on them when it comes to their claims of superiority. They have alleged that the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition had degenerated to such an extent that it needed the type of reform that only their leader Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati could provide. This was also not an idea that Bhaktisiddhanta came up with on his own, however. Bhaktivinode had reacted to a sahajiya group known as the karta-bhajas, with whom he had some affiliation for a period of time until he discovered their deviations from the orthodoxy. The difference is that Bhaktivinode did not condemn the mainstream Vaishnavas, whereas Bhaktisiddhanta apparently did accuse them of polluting the waters. To date no substantial proof has ever been offered of that assertion, yet thousands of people remain convinced of it and rationalize their agendas accordingly. The truth is that the tradition was actually strong and essentially free of corruption and there were many important historical figures within it at the end of the 19th Century, who were actually famous as opposed to Bhaktivinode who was relatively obscure. Whatever element of corruption existed and continues to exist had already been pushed to the fringes as a result of their deviations. They never were representative of the tradition's maintstream, although many would like to believe so. I am sure there are plenty of people out there that have this notion that all of the babajis at Radha Kund are staging their own personal rasa dances with women. They are content to cling to such beliefs absent any proof, and they certainly are not about to actually research such claims to see if they are in fact true.
Ananda - Tue, 02 Sep 2003 00:30:33 +0530
Thank you for your time and attention to my approaching this forum. I appreciate your care in trying to deal with a newcomer who did not quite present a clear query or challenge, which I apologize for.
At this point I will withdraw because I don't think I can handle the discussion any further. To hear about Srila Bhaktisidhanta Sarasvati in the way it is presented here has been a blow to my confidence. I have to take a brake for the time being. It is the prudence mechanism triggered in my psyche, I guess. "Shades of grey" indeed, but my heart again has to face the only two possible choices: black or white. And I am tired of having to empty my heart of one to let another in.
Thanks again,
Ananda
Guest_Jagannathdas - Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:44:32 +0530
Ananda I hope you return to view the boards from time to time. Particularly for westerners, without knowledge of Bengali, we remain unaware of significant portions of Gaudiya Vaishnava history, this forum offers an opportunity to understand important developments in our history that are practically unavailable elsewhere. I think this requires a quest for truth.
I wish to refer to Ananga's post, I recently read, The Economics of Ecstasy - Tantra, Secrecy, and Power in Colonial Bengal by Hugh B. Urban, published by Oxford University Press. This books explores as far as is possible (without diksa), the Kartabhaja sect.
Bhaktivinode Thakur is mentioned as a reformer, one of many who wished to, "purge or sanitize the tradition of any remaining Sahajiya or Tantric elements". However, their is no mention of his having an affiliation with the group, this I find interesting, what is your source for his affiliation, can you elaborate on this?
The Kartabhaja's primary text is the Bhaver Gita, a collection of mystical songs difficult to interpret to the uninitiated. On an exoteric level they will not offend anyone, it is only when their esoteric nature is understood that they reveal their true nature.
Was it that it took Bhaktivinode some time before he understood their true nature?
From this book (Economics of Ecstasy), it seems clear to me that much of B.T.'s work involved absorbing the successful elements of the Kartabhajas songs (e.g. their use of the marketplace as metaphor and appeal to the poor) while presenting the conclusions of the Gaudiya orthodoxy.
Madhava - Tue, 02 Sep 2003 02:54:53 +0530
In his own words, from Svalikhita-jivani...
QUOTE
110. After thinking a good deal about my complicated illness, mother spoke with a leather worker. He said he would bring a fakir the following morning and that he would cure me by means of exorcism. I waited in the morning and a very dark man of the leather working caste [a Muchi], who previously [I'd seen] playing the tol drum, named Fakir Chanda arrived. Using the leaves of the Bakash he performed the exorcism and then gave me gura leaves to eat. Then, [coming] close to me, he gave me a mantra and asked me to utter it regularly. [He told me] all would be revealed in a dream. He asked my mother to cook only vegetarian food for me.
111. He said to eat rice cooked with ripe tamarind. This was the prescription. After two days, while I slept, I dreamed that a black snake went out from my body. In the morning I related this to the fakir. He said that all danger had passed. "Now you do not have to follow the regulations. Go and take a bath and then eat. But continue to utter the mantra. Within two or three days your illness will be entirely cured." I then went and ate heartily. But the fakir declared, "You must not eat any meat, and by the strength of your mind you should call upon the Satya Purusha [the Supreme Person]. Neither should you eat any demigod's prasada. You should not worship any demigod."
112. My illness gradually became health. The fakir said, "Come, you should approach your Gurudeva!" I went with a happy heart. The residence of the fakirs was in the Muchi area of Beledanga. Gurudeva was also a Muchi, and previously he had made shoes. Gurudeva had several rooms. He stayed in one room in the temple of meditation and was sitting there [when I arrived]. He was on a raised clay veranda when I went and offered prostrations to him. He bestowed [his] blessings on my body with his merciful hand and gave me four pieces of muraki [puffed rice with molasses], which I ate with confidence. Gurudeva then said, "Your illness is completely healed?" I said, "The disease is completely gone, but the itching does not leave me."
113. Then Gurudeva gave the order, "Beat Kalu Raya and Dakshina Raya." Immediately upon hearing this order the fakir took a new broom and on a raised stone began to beat Kalu Raya and Dakshina Raya. Some emotion began to rise in Gurudeva and he began to cry and cry, and sang this song: "Once upon a time the feet of man began to sweat, therefore the Ganga began to flow."
114. When his emotions [bhava] subsided he commanded me saying, "Today your itching will become better. At night, whatever you dream you should come and tell [me] in the morning." Amazingly, during the night, my sores almost all dried up. In the night I dreamt that I put calcium powder on the sores. In the morning I related my dream to Gurudeva and he gave an order [that I was to be given] calcium powder. I used the powder, and after three days my sores were all gone. Now I began to eat good quality food and my body began to fill out. Gradually my strength and boldness increased. One day, Gurudeva showed me mercy by changing the mantra [given to me] and gave me a more appropriate mantra. Daily I chanted this mantra with devotion. I dreamt many kinds of dreams. Whatever was on my mind during the day that I dreamed about at night. Gurudeva gave me the order to heal others' disease. And that I attempted to do.
115. I would go to Gurudeva daily, at any time [I wished]. His name was Goloka. One day he said to me, "O Kedar Babu, our dharma is very pure. No harm [should be done] to any Jiva. One should not worship any demigod. One should be kind to others and [be of] good conduct: these are the foundations [of our creed]. Previously, Prabhu Aul Chanda preached this dharma by means of twenty two fakirs. Those twenty two fakirs established themselves in twenty two places and each extended the sampradaya. Among them one Ramasaran Pal of Ghosh Pada also preached but his actions were improper. Our own original fakir established the sampradaya at the village of Gontra, and his teachings were good. "We do not accept any Jati titles. Whatever is [generally considered to be] muchi is suchi if it is used for Krishna, and whatever is [generally considered to be] suchi is muchi if it is separate from Krishna. There is no fault in being married, but one should be sexually united with one's wife only once in a month, more frequent contact than that is not good. To the extent that semen is retained within the body to that extent it is beneficial. According to our teachings Radha and Krishna are the true couple. Even though They are a pair they are one. Though They appear to have form in fact They [have no material form]. They are like a Lord and [His] Lady. The doctrine that this couple is the pure male and female is very auspicious. Man should be like this, like a god and goddess immortal. O Kedar Babu, mercy has been bestowed on you; very soon you will know the truth of the divine couple."
116. I discussed all these matters to some extent with others and learned that our fakirs were Kartabhaja [a sect devoted to Sri Chaitanya]. In comparison with the Ghoshpara their behaviour was very good. Be that as it may, I had faith in the mantra and [their] doctrines. Even though Gurudeva was a muchi I had no lack of faith [in him]. One day he said, "Soon the village of Ula will be mostly destroyed. The people would die from fever and disease. How will the people remain in such a village?"
QUOTE
186. One day, one of my grandfather's servants chastised some Jati Vaisnavas [hereditary Vaisnavas] for the offense of fishing. They said that Vaisnavas' killing living entities was wicked. I heard this conversation and concluded that it was not proper for Vaisnavas to kill living beings. The Saktas perform sacrifices and kill animals and then eat the meat. Vaisnavas are [not really of] the material world. Moreover, I recall a Vaishnava named Jaga[?], who came to our house dancing and performing Nama Kirtan, and from whose eyes poured torrents of tears, and all these incidents created great faith [in Bhakti in me]. When I was ill the Kartabhaja made me healthy, and I realised the strength of the Vaishnava religion.