Hindus what is your opinion on Srila Prabhupada ?

[ratikala]

namaskaram amrut ji , :namaste

Namaste,

Not to speak ill of Srila, as it has nothing to do with it, but my uncle before shifting to America had donated some amount to his foundation. After he left India, all his posts are redirected at my house.

Once I received a letter about 'Hare Rama, Hare Krishna Rock Concert'

I like that you say "Not to speak ill of srila,".... what many of the deciples do after his death is not something that can realy be blamed on him , there seems to be a lot of animosity towards srila prabhupada on the strength of the actions of his devotees , I must admit I am not realy overjoyed at the thought of a "hare rama , hare krishna rock concert " on the grounds of the possibly dissrespectfull nature of a rock concert , if one wants a dovotional celebration try a giant satsang , but then these things are cultural and it takes years to break down cultural conditioning .

Once the founder leaves, there is decline in foundation.

agreed :namaste and unfortunately this is something that is very hard to stop , it has happened also in buddhist circles . but it is also the nature of life , particularly kaliyuga , change and decline !

The atmosphere in Juhu, Mumbai is not much conductive to meditation, though it have bhava. It's too crowded, like a popular Balaji temple.

sadly I have not visited india but what I know of temples here the big temples can be very bussy and not condusive to meditation , I prefer small temples and prefer to emerce myself in serva that in it self is a meditation ,

Again, regarding His commentary on Gita, my neighbour has a copy. It does have sanskrit verse in Devanagari script, later followed by romanized Sanskrit, with word-to-word meaning.

I have allways appreciated this although I have found some inconcistencies in the translations , I have tried to see them in context and tried to see that it is no easy task especialy when one is also trying to convey an understanding for this reason a literal translation can be missleading .

at times I have sat with many different translations of the gita and tried to work out how they each support such different inturpretations .

I think what srila prabhupada was realy trying to do by saying 'bhagavad gita as it is' ...is to present the bhagavad gita as it was taught to him , as it is taught in a genuine sampradaya , as opposed to translations presented by sanskrit schoolars , prabhupada was trying to preserve it as a devotional text rather than have it presented as a literary work .
of course there are many different inturpretations of the gita occuring within different traditions due to their vaired veiws , this is understandable , but I do not think in truth that was the reason for srila prabhupada using the 'as it is ' ....it was the amount of references in the west to it being a litary work that offended .

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

Many say he brought hinduism to America and that may be teue. but I found out about hinduism withput knowing about him and very glad I did too. he was horribly sexist and had I discovered hinduism through his works I would have never looked deeper into the faith

many say all kinds of unfounded things , .....

srila prabhupada was simply carrying out the instructions of his guru and attempting to bring his own sampradayas teachings to the west , he was not the first , but he was the one who came at a time of great need and he was the one who managed to put the words 'krishna consciousness' in to the western vocabulary .

many seem to hate him for this , ...in truth this is pure envy , any person that finds reason to criticise a man who acheived so much simply because he did not manage to totaly transform the minds of every one of his devotees . is there any one tradition or guru that can transform the minds of his students with the wave of his danda ?... no ! and if there was someone would soon stand up and accuse that master of brainwashing !

I think we have to look more carefully at our own behavior and concentrate on ruling out our own faults before we begin to criticise the behavior of those that have dedicated there entire lives to the service of their guru and to the service of krsna .

 

[MochaRadha]

Lol envy really. no envy over a secist atleast not from me

 

[Amrut]

Namaste ratikala ji,

The thing is, if you want to spread, then there has to be a compromise. You will need staff, and not all are sanyasins. Volunteers and trusties and all rajas gunis and you will have to give some powers to them, as you cannot have a look at everything.

Regarding mis-translations, you will not accept anything that you are not living or that denies existence of path, hence they will never accept advaita teachings as you will need to have body (physical or subtle) to enjoy lila. So you will skip, that verses or interpret them in such a way that it does not contradict your philosophy. This is true for all paths. Hence inconsistencies will remain.

Again, Srila will not comment on Anu Gita and Uttara Gita which talks of Yoga ans meditating on OM and on SHiva ans shakti, as it is necessary of the path to unite shikta with Shiva.

Commentaries by Shri Ramanujacharya and Shri Madhavacharya on upanishads nad Brahma sutras was because they had to defend their philosophy.

Upanishads and Brahma sutras are not chanted and taught to every vaishnav. Their main text of worship is Srimad Bhagavad, that too omitting advaita in it and Bhagavad Gita from their POV. This is logical as Gita and Bhagavat covers all types of people, so fully practising or digesting all 700 verses of Gita is not possible. you can either follow karma, bhakti or Jnana or Yog. Though there is a blend of all 3 or 4 paths, one is predominant.

So when people try to justify something quoting upanishads, I ask, do you practice it, is it a part of your daily spiritual activity. If not then why do you try to correct another belief system, even though you do not practice meditation the advaita way and do not chant upanishads like mandukya, which is not of your concern. Bhagavat is enough to lift you spiritually.

So you leave things that does not suit you which according to me is fine. The problem comes when you start accusing and to prove your point, you defame other philosophies rather than intensifying your bhakti. Refer Sthita-pragna (BG 2:55 - 2:59). But it is human nature and the futile fights continue, more importantly disciples take it as a war. This does more harm to you than help, as one cannot rise above lower, animal nature and emotions. Great Chaitanya Mahaprabhu transformed 2 sinners into sevakas. He did not accuse them, frame them, made people against them or used his divine powers to subdue them. He transformed them and sparked dormant bhakti in them.

As far as ISKCON is concerned, they are attracting youth in both east and west. They adopt such ways like rock concert, so that once youth steps in and comes in touch via a party or get-together, then if a youth shows interest in hare rama, hare krishna philosophy and way of life after intro lecture, then they can encourage him and convince him to be a ISKCONite

Aum
Amrut

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

I found out about hinduism withput knowing about him

and very glad I did too.

he was horribly sexist and

had i discovered hinduism through his works I would have never looked deeper into the faith

One improbablity added to another yet they do not cancel eachother out. How can these be neutralized?

What Guru's sanskrit translations did Hindu knowledge be known to you?

A Swami who is sexist? Isn't sex all about the word sex as a verb?
Do you mean 'gender-ist'?
If I google 'sexist' what images will I get?

Do all Swamis endorse all the sexists on the WWW? Or was it the Hare Krishna founder only that expressed 'sexist' views.

Btw, isn't sexist views the reality of life? Only educated people have time to measure degrees of sexist mentality of swamis and followers of monks?

When cheer leaders dance at half time, it's not about monism vs dialectics---I think its about 'sexist appeal'.

So are you saying the Srila had no sense of 'sexist appeal'? That no sport events wants to hear a lecture from the Srila at the halftime break.

Are there Gurus with more 'sexist appeal'?

How does degree of 'sexist appeal or replusion' factor in scholarly translations of sanskrit works?

The guru Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura used to simply count the number of times 'Krishna's Name' appeared in his disciple's preaching as an indicator of how well his disciple is spreading the Vaishnava gospel. Aside from that ulterior motive I don't see the importance of guaging Srila Prabhupad in any other way.

 

[MochaRadha]

Sexist means you believe one gender is superior than the other and yes ive read many times he told women to be obedient.

 

[Amrut]

:namaste,

well if you think of sexist remarks when he writes 'man' instead of person, then it may be used in generic sense, not strickly taking 'man' as male.

Again, it is said that women are qualified for Jnana. I do not know if shastras say that women are eligible for sanyas. To have jnana, sanyas is not necessary. Important is to be a Jnani and not sanyasini.

Shri Adi Shankara did not gave sanyas to any female devotee. Lord Buddha did not want to give sanyas to women disciples, but after convincing and some self decision of women decision to keep following buddha, he finally accepted the decision to give sanyas to women. But he also said that the dharma, which was about to live for 1000 years will now stay for 500 years.

This does not mean that women are not fit for Jnana. They deserve to be chant God's name. Ritualist worship is different. Role of women is important in both society and spiritual life.

One needs to give women protection, for which you will have preserve money and keep some arrangement. Again, you cannot ask women to move naked in jungles and walk length and breath of India. This is not Indian Custom.

Sri Ramakrishna did not gave sanyas to any women devotees including Sarada Maa.

Radha did not take sanyas, Maa sita did not take sanyas, Anandmoyi Maa and Amma (who are considered as avatars), did not take sanyas, but wore white clothes. They could have if they wanted too.

Of course there are exceptions and some female jnani saints who were sanyasins. Gargi and maitri, but in general, women are not allowed to take sanyas in Indian Tradition.

All the things like obeying husband, listening to all, eating after all have eaten, thinking of husband as god-like, etc if looked from spiritual POV, help on develop qualities like, tolerance, acceptance, faith, one-pointedness, receptivity, etc which men has to develop the hard way by meditating. Other things like pressing her down by in-laws constantly hurts ego, thereby reducing it.

Again, if a women becomes widow, she is not allowed to take part in social functions, wear only white dress, no social responsibility, they are told to stay in house, cook and eat their own food and only God is their refuge.

If you observe, monks live in the same way. Widows now are free from worldly duties and so can concentrate on spiritual life. No one will disturb her. Infact if she does not read Gita, she is been taunted. Monks wear only one colored cloth. They live a simple life.

The only difference is - women has protection of home. She is not out-cast and is allowed to stay at homes, thereby giving them protection. They do not need to take sanyas, not that they do not deserve.

Evil practices like Sati are to be not accepted, but from mental standpoint, a widow has to burn down her attachment with physical body with jnanagni - fire of wisdom.

Women after marrying will have to adapt to a totally new surrounding, new place, new family members and train accordingly. So she has power to adapt, adjust and accept new situation she finds herself in.

In brahmins, after thread ceremony - upa-nayana sanskar, men are allowed to perform rituals. There are three threads. After marriage, another set of three threads are given. They are of his wife. So it is the responsibility of husband to take care of wife not only from material POV, but from spiritual POV. Wife binds family with bhava. Bhava (emotions) are important in both social and spiritual life, which we get from women. Without bhava, everything is mechanical, even chanting God's name.

Men are naturally stronger then women. They have responsibility to protect, safegaurd and feed the family. It is a head-ache, as one cannot surrender 100 % if one accepts responsibility. Wife is already surrendered to husband and so she is free from this head-ache. Wife has to run the house as efficiently as possible with available resources.

In animal life too, dominant male do not hunt, but protects territory. He will only come into picture when a big prey has to be hunted e.g. lions hunting giraffe and wilder beast. Female lions are more skillful as they hunt often than male. Only when brute force is required males part part in group hunting.

God created women in such a way that Kundalini can easily rise as compared with males. Qualities which are developed in females in their family and social life never develop in males. They have to make an extra effort.

Lastly, Brahmadev first created only 4 males, but all were sanyasins with no interest in world. To run this world, he created women and there were prajapatis.

From spiritual POV, it's always - Advantage Women.

But moksha is not the goal of 99.9 % people. So what happens, is that mother-in-law will keep pressing her daughter-in-law. The result: it's like spring. More you press, with more force it's bounces back. You can tie body, what how can you tie down mind?

The result, western philosophy was accepted - equality of men and women. It is good if there is no spiritual goal, but if you have a spiritual goal, the natural advantage is lost. This oppression and opposition was kept in heart of women from centuries. Britishers (East India Company) were just instruments and cannot be blamed. It is we who were weak to accept their philosophy, as Jnana was almost destroyed says Krishna 5000 years ago in Gita. 99 hammers were already hit, one final blow was required to break the rock, which was done by Britishers. Destruction of Jnana is responsible for destruction of Indian values and spirituality. It is an effect of Age - Kali Yuga (kalyug)

There is no question about ability of a women, but the question is sanyas compulsory to realize true nature?

Just a personal opinion.

EDIT: I would use the word 'Gender Inequality' then 'sexist'

m:

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Do you mean 'gender-ist'?
If I google 'sexist' what images will I get?

Do all Swamis endorse all the sexists on the WWW? Or was it the Hare Krishna founder only that expressed 'sexist' views.

Not all Swami's except sexism. Many of the Shakta faiths has had woman Guru's for as long as we can look back in History. This is supported by the Tantric scriptures.

The Ramakrishna order in the first 1/2 of the 20th century gave their woman Swami's their own order with their own leadership. The fonder Ramakrishna Maths Guru was a woman. Her name was Bhairavi Brahmani.

In the Vedic Times we know woman were Swamis. They had the option of going to Gurukul just like the men.

Some of the Vedic Hymns were discovered and composed by female Rishis.

The way woman are treated today in Hinduism is because of the degradation of the religion. The discrimination against woman did not exist like today in ancient times. Those Swami who support sexism today have a degraded belief system(At least in that subject).

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

Sexist means one gender is superior than the other.

But that is a fact of reality. (leaving aside the miracle of giving Birth).

Before you compose a reply. Remember what scripture says about 'dharma'.

Dharma is the duties assigned to a beings. Each Must perform their alloted duties.

It is not an invention nor an original idea. Where ever you 'read' that a woman must be submissive or obedient, there most probably first mentioned how the man has to do his duties without excuses and without faltering.

I guess a real paradox occurs when all the MEN around are crazy dogs. Then yes, forego such men and get away from them.

Btw, aside from what SP said, what about what society at large says?

SP does not work in advertising and Fashion design and pop music and (ex-US Prez) Clinton- (ex-NYS Governor) Spitzer- (ex-US Senator) Weiner line of businesses.

I do find your concerns as in-sincere especially since I can show news footage and newspaper articles and even advertisements of the above Civic Pillars of society, yet you, out of convienence neglect to Quote a dictum issued by Prabhupada. Surely Prabhupada, first emphasized how the heavy lifting work was done by a man ... followed by the duties of the women folk.

BTW, Mocha-Radha, what is Krishna's stance and advise and injunctions on this subject? Does Krishna cover this subject in the Bhagavad-Gita?
What is your opinion on what Krishna says about women's duties in the Gita?

Btw, how can sexist men expect to (karmically) benefit (in a future birth) from putting women in 2nd class positions?

Imo, that's like thinking how can a criminal (karmically) benefit (in a future birth) from putting Police in class below his status?

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Sri Ramakrishna did not gave sanyas to any women devotees including Sarada Maa.

Bhagavan Ramakrishna did not give sanyas to anyone men or woman. He gave a few followers, an Ochre cloth, they took there vows later with Swami Vivekananda (in 1886).

The Woman disciple/saint Gauri Ma also renounced the world and put on Ochre.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauri_Ma

It was Swami Vivekananda dream to set up a Math for females. This happened years after his death.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram amrut ji ,

Namaste ratikala ji,

The thing is, if you want to spread, then there has to be a compromise. You will need staff, and not all are sanyasins. Volunteers and trusties and all rajas gunis and you will have to give some powers to them, as you cannot have a look at everything.

I am assuming by the use of 'you' you are not refering to me directly ?

"if one wants to spread".... , if srila peabhupada wanted to fullfill his guru maharaj's wishes and create temples and advance krishna consciousness , then he passes this wish to his own deciples , and as you say yes they will do so according to their own understanding and their own abbility , I agree it is not posible for the founder to be responcible for the actions of his devotees especialy after his death .

Regarding mis-translations, you will not accept anything that you are not living or that denies existence of path, hence they will never accept advaita teachings as you will need to have body (physical or subtle) to enjoy lila. So you will skip, that verses or interpret them in such a way that it does not contradict your philosophy. This is true for all paths. Hence inconsistencies will remain.

no in general one will not accept what one is not accustomed to , ....

however I personaly have no problem with an advaitin accepting one set of teachings , and my self another . after all I allready accept two veiws (buddhist and vaisnava) which to some are contradictory , yet within me they sit comfortably . you have your path I have mine but this does not make either invalid , it is simply that this life is too short for us to perfect the understanding of all the many traditions , but there comes a point in ones sadhana where one goes beoynd some of the boundarys laid out by individual schools of thought .
in this instance the inconcistencies are clearly understood as veiws fron a different perspective , explained by and for different minds .

Again, Srila will not comment on Anu Gita and Uttara Gita which talks of Yoga ans meditating on OM and on SHiva ans shakti, as it is necessary of the path to unite shikta with Shiva.

again this is quite understandable for many it would be too confusing , one starts ones spiritual life by dint of karma , one is born into a particular fammily so one follows that tradition , here the society is such that religious traditions have broken down a person with a need to find a spiritual purpose in life must go out and seek to find a source of teachings , and the imprints of karma will predespose us to one tradition or another , one person will feel comfortable with worship another a more philosopical approach is more fitting as krsna explains some are more suited to follow the path of jnanna yoga another bhakti yoga but it is not totaly cut and dried there can be a little bhakti in the jnanni , and a little jnanna in the bhakta . but all in all we should be acceptant of each other .

Commentaries by Shri Ramanujacharya and Shri Madhavacharya on upanishads nad Brahma sutras was because they had to defend their philosophy.

I am not one for debate I see no reason to defend or argue a philosophical stand point , in the end it merely serves to divide understanding where as I would rather see us come together , thus I chose a guru who confessed to teach sanatana dharma .

we should be proud of our traditions but never come to the verbal blows I have seen happen in debates .

Upanishads and Brahma sutras are not chanted and taught to every vaishnav. Their main text of worship is Srimad Bhagavad, that too omitting advaita in it and Bhagavad Gita from their POV. This is logical as Gita and Bhagavat covers all types of people, so fully practising or digesting all 700 verses of Gita is not possible. you can either follow karma, bhakti or Jnana or Yog. Though there is a blend of all 3 or 4 paths, one is predominant.

to me bhagavad gita is enough , just understand this and libberation is attained :bow:

So when people try to justify something quoting upanishads, I ask, do you practice it, is it a part of your daily spiritual activity. If not then why do you try to correct another belief system, even though you do not practice meditation the advaita way and do not chant upanishads like mandukya, which is not of your concern. Bhagavat is enough to lift you spiritually.

:bow:

So you leave things that does not suit you which according to me is fine. The problem comes when you start accusing and to prove your point, you defame other philosophies rather than intensifying your bhakti. Refer Sthita-pragna (BG 2:55 - 2:59). But it is human nature and the futile fights continue, more importantly disciples take it as a war. This does more harm to you than help, as one cannot rise above lower, animal nature and emotions. Great Chaitanya Mahaprabhu transformed 2 sinners into sevakas. He did not accuse them, frame them, made people against them or used his divine powers to subdue them. He transformed them and sparked dormant bhakti in them.

if deciples take it to war then this is ahamkara and gross ignorance .

it was nityananda prabhu who felt no animosity towards jagai and madhai even though in a drunken rage they had hit him with a clay pot making fun of his chanting ,
sri chaitania raised his hand to defend nityananda , ....
it was nityananda who said he would not stop distributing prema ,and beged chaitanya for their pardon , and upon seeing nityanandas devotion jagi and madhai saw the error of their ways .

jai nityananda bol , hari bol hari bol :bow:

As far as ISKCON is concerned, they are attracting youth in both east and west. They adopt such ways like rock concert, so that once youth steps in and comes in touch via a party or get-together, then if a youth shows interest in hare rama, hare krishna philosophy and way of life after intro lecture, then they can encourage him and convince him to be a ISKCONite

Aum
Amrut

yes here in england they are working hard to bring the hindu youth back to krsna consciousness , the hindu youth are liking to behave like westerners drinking , meat eating and filling their time with consumeristic preocupations , and yes it involves some compromise , for me the new style of approaching krsna is not what I would want to be involved in but I have learnt another way and I feel fortunate for that as that was what was right for me , but providing that higher levels of teaching are available then it is good , once the principles of sanatana dharma are re established then some more serious study can be taken up ....

but what concerns me is that we are accidentaly making more divisions , so we have vaisnavas , we have gaudia vaisnavas , and now we have "ISKCONite's"where will it end how many divisions do we need now there are divisions within Isckon dissagreeing with which diretion to go , and how srila prabhupadas instructions should be inturpreted .

prehaps we should think as nityananda prabhu did and just focus on distributing prema ; ...heart felt love of god :bow:

 

[Amrut]

Bhagavan Ramakrishna did not give sanyas to anyone men or woman. He gave a few followers, an Ochre cloth, they took there vows later with Swami Vivekananda (in 1886).

The Woman disciple/saint Gauri Ma also renounced the world and put on Ochre.
Gauri Ma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was Swami Vivekananda dream to set up a Math for females. This happened years after his death.

Namaste,

I am not knowledgeable like you are and have studied limited shastras.

I have only Read Sri Ramakrishna's Jivan Charitra in Gujarati, an abridged version, not by Swami Saradananda. Whenever I read it I am filled with bhakti. Even when I am most disturbed (emotionally / mentally), after reading a few paragraphs, I would calm down and OM would pop up. My mind becomes very stable. So Sri Ramakrishna has high influence upon me (and my uncle). I was told to read that book and continued for 8 years till I got orders to stop reading it. I am not associated with Sri Ramakrishna Ashram nor have visited dakshineshwar. I have only visited khar ashram twice in 10 years of my advaita practice.

As far as I know, Sri Ramakrishna did not gave 16 disciples names, but gave them ochre cloths, indicating that they are fit for sanyas.

If Vivekananda wanted he himself would have given sanyas to female devotees. Again I have not read Vivekanada's biography so I cannot comment on his wish that women should be given sanyas. I repeat giving Jnana and chanting mantra is a different thing. Women can definitely chant God's name and are and should be looked with an eye of respect.

Sri Ramakrishna also gave all shakti via tratak to Vivekananda and gave him responsibility to take take of other 15 brothers.

Sri Ramakrishna did not himself gave sanyas to Gauri Maa. I have not read it in his Jivan charitra that Gauri Maa took sanyas in Sri Ramakrishna's presence or with his permission, nor did Sri Sarada Maa took sanyas after Sri Ramakrishna left his physical body. If Gauri Maa herself took sanyas, then it is her own decision and not Sri Ramakrishna's decision. Again taking sanyas after Self Realization is a different isue than taking sanyas before Self Realization when in sadhaka avastha (state). Both cannot be compared. Again taking sanyas to hide herself is something that has to be thought of.

I also do not know if Sri Sarada Maa gave sanyas to any female devotees. But I have not read her biopgaphy, so I cannot comment on it, but Sister Nivedita is not called Swamini Nivedita.

Regarding Ashram that is operating today, it is not completely following the teachings of Sri Ramakrishna. My uncle is in regular touch with monks of Sri Ramakrishna order. I would not like to open up things, but he has personally observed that Sri Ramakrishna did not taught. Just to point out, some projects need a lot of money and the one donating has not earned in fair way. It's all black money. Monks now a day also have a laptop, good high quality, latest mobile like iphone, they have chat accounts, they appeal for donations and even play as middle men. My uncle knows he he was approached by a Swami who had committed on my uncle's behalf to donate some money and help someone. So things are not pure as they used to be.

Equality of men and women from practical POV is different issue and regarding spiritual POV is another.

I do not say women inferior or not fit for sanyas. What I have said is that they are worthy of Jnana. I have not read that Women worthy of Sanyas. Recent trends like Swami Chinmaya also giving sanyas to women and they live together, come together at arti were not followed by Adi Shankara.

We have female forms of God worshipped.

10 Sikh Gurus and founders of different faith etc (Buddha, Pagambar, Mahavir Swami, Swaminarayana, 4 vaishnavas acharyas, et al) were all males. This does not mean females are inferior.

Sri Ramakrishna did have sayanisi i.e. Bhairavi brahmani as his Guru, but he did not followed all her instructions

e.g. She warned and did not liked Sri Ramakrishna mixing or interacting with Sri Totapuri who was an advaita sadhu. Sri Ramakrishna did not cared about this instructions. She even told that all that sadhuhas is dry jnan-vichar (jnana-philosophy) and that you will loose all your bhakti rasa if you interact with him.

Like you pointed out that tantra shastras may have has female monks. I trust you. I cannot comment as I have not studied tantra shastras.

So you can say that opinion is split and on that basis one cannot accuse the philosophy by Srila. I do not endorse his ways like, the accusing part to advaitins, or hi sway of spreading or the way he expresses his views regarding women, may not be right or suitable in today's time.

Aum

 

[Amrut]

namaskaram amrut ji ,


I am assuming by the use of 'you' you are not refering to me directly ?

Namaste ratika ji,

oh no. Not to you directly. Sorry my english is bad and so is my presentation.
. Glad that you took it in right sense.

I agree with you on all your points

You must do what your Guru says, but remember, Sri Ramakrishna says, a patient cannot treat patient. Only a doctor can treat a patient. We are all patients, i.e. sadhakas and not siddhas.

If you do not have prema then how will you give prema.

One day I was travelling by local train. There was an ISKCON sanyasin who was distributing Bhagavad Gita. I did not pay attention. He pressed me to have a look and said it is not a marketing. At that time, I was in college and did not live a spiritual life. I had not read Gita. So I genuinely asked, What is Gita and what's written in it, how will it help me, did it help you. He did not answer it and left. To another uncle I asked same question, he was a devotee of Swami Ramsukhdas ji Maharaj. He was distributing Gita for Free. He also did not answered the question as he himself did not read it. He said, I am distributing because my guru says Gita is excellent and I have faith in him.

But the question, did you read it yourself ????

This is true for practical approach that half knowledge is dangerous. IF you cannot understand Gita, how can you give lecture on Gita?

Aum
Amrut

 

[Amrut]

ratikala ji, I also agree that we should read and follow what books say and not talk our own philosophy.

Aum
Amrut

 

[Amrut]

It was Swami Vivekananda dream to set up a Math for females. This happened years after his death.

Namaste WY ji,

I trust what you say. Just to make a note that having a different math dedicated to just women monks (swamini and sayasini) is different from keeping both male and female in one math and then having interaction with each other.

Not for the sake of argument, for asking positively, do you know any system in which women are also ordered like male monks to be a parivrajak (walk length and breath of India), our actual tradition which shapes mind of sanyasins. They also know the psychology of entire India.

Aum
Amrut

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Namaste WY ji,

I trust what you say. Just to make a note that having a different math dedicated to just women monks (swamini and sayasini) is different from keeping both male and female in one math and then having interaction with each other.

This is very true. Mixing men and woman Swami's would cause many to break there vow.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Namaste WY ji,

I trust what you say. Just to make a note that having a different math dedicated to just women monks (swamini and sayasini) is different from keeping both male and female in one math and then having interaction with each other.

I believe that you are correct. There are no female groups of monks walking around India. I believe because of what would happen to the swamini's. In Vedic times there were swaminis. The storys of both Gargi Vachaknavi and Maitreyi are proof of this.

 

[Amrut]

I believe that you are correct. There are no female groups of monks walking around India. I believe because of what would happen to the swamini's. In Vedic times there were swaminis. The storys of both Gargi Vachaknavi and Maitreyi are proof of this.

Oh yes, old is gold. Gargi and Maetri were Jnanis. But the thing is Adi Shankara made 4 maths in four corners of India, east, west, north, south maybe for this purpose. Unfortunately, even male monks of many if not most ashrams or lineage do not go on a parivrajaka. But there are a few, who not even accept money and have no permanent home. Just one time food is enough.

I have also seen recently that even aghori would give women diksha.

Men+women is not equal to sex, but the intimacy, soft corner or attachment, even though in limits may not be good for sadhakas, as they have to drop all bondage. So technically in words of Swami Chinmaya it's

Alone to ALONE All Alone ALL the Way

Nice talking to you.

Aum

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram amrut ji ,

Namaste ratika ji,

oh no. Not to you directly. Sorry my english is bad and so is my presentation.
. Glad that you took it in right sense.

not a problem , it is realy not so bad , but please correct me if ever ti missunderstand you :namaste

You must do what your Guru says, but remember, Sri Ramakrishna says, a patient cannot treat patient. Only a doctor can treat a patient. We are all patients, i.e. sadhakas and not siddhas.

very simmilar things were said by lord buddha , he also likened dharma to medicine and himself as physician , to a buddhist dharma implies law therefore the teachings of the buddha are like medicine for the mind .

If you do not have prema then how will you give prema.

yes first one must understand how sweet it is then understanding and enjoying its sweetness we will not be able to hold back that love .

One day I was travelling by local train. There was an ISKCON sanyasin who was distributing Bhagavad Gita. I did not pay attention. He pressed me to have a look and said it is not a marketing. At that time, I was in college and did not live a spiritual life. I had not read Gita. So I genuinely asked, What is Gita and what's written in it, how will it help me, did it help you. He did not answer it and left. To another uncle I asked same question, he was a devotee of Swami Ramsukhdas ji Maharaj. He was distributing Gita for Free. He also did not answered the question as he himself did not read it. He said, I am distributing because my guru says Gita is excellent and I have faith in him.
But the question, did you read it yourself ????

Ah he has been told that there is merit to be gained from distributing the gita , but he has not yet realised that there is merit to be gained from reading it

This is true for practical approach that half knowledge is dangerous. IF you cannot understand Gita, how can you give lecture on Gita?

krsna said , .... out of many thouasnds of men one may endeavour for perfection , and out of those who have accheived perfection , hardly one knows me in truth .
ch.7 v.3

similarly it is very difficult to understabd the gita , for some to know that it was spoken by krsna is enough , .... but yes half knowledge is dangerous especialy in the hands of someone who thinks he is knowing when he does not .

there was a very nice story our guru once told he was telling about an incident when some brahmin preists thinking them selves to be learned jnani's made fun of a poor illiterate man who wanted to hold the gita , they laughed at him saying you are an illiterate fool what use is the gita to you , the poor man sat looking at the gita with tears in his eyes saying I just want to look at the beautifull words spoken by sri krsna .
the story is of course a perfect example of prema :bow:

 

[Vinayaka]

One day I was travelling by local train. There was an ISKCON sanyasin who was distributing Bhagavad Gita. I did not pay attention. He pressed me to have a look and said it is not a marketing. At that time, I was in college and did not live a spiritual life. I had not read Gita. So I genuinely asked, What is Gita and what's written in it, how will it help me, did it help you. He did not answer it and left. To another uncle I asked same question, he was a devotee of Swami Ramsukhdas ji Maharaj. He was distributing Gita for Free. He also did not answered the question as he himself did not read it. He said, I am distributing because my guru says Gita is excellent and I have faith in him.

There was an aggressive group (blocking the main path) at a famous Murugan temple when I was there ... largely being ignored by the 10 000 or so devotees. I just felt so much like going over there and saying, "Just drop the books and come worship God with me!"

Alas!