Hindus what is your opinion on Srila Prabhupada ?

[Wannabe Yogi]

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.

I don't know how many woman are monks in tantra. I only know that they teach and are welcome to practice just like men. Much like the Vedic times. If the modern beliefs differ from the teachings of the Vedas, I will agree with Vedas every time.

My teacher is a Hindu Saint who lived in the Jungles of Assam. She lived and traveled all over India as a woman.

If Adi Sankara did not let woman become monks. Maybe it was because it was not safe. If your argument that woman should not walk around India as homeless wondering monks. Never staying in one place more then 3 days. Eating only what is offered. Only going inside during the monsoon season. I tend to agree, to dangerous !!!

 

[Amrut]

I don't know how many woman are monks in tantra. I only know that they teach and are welcome to practice just like men. Much like the Vedic times. If the modern beliefs differ from the teachings of the Vedas, I will agree with Vedas every time.

My teacher is a Hindu Saint who lived in the Jungles of Assam. She lived and traveled all over India as a woman.

If Adi Sankara did not let woman become monks. Maybe it was because it was not safe. If your argument that woman should not walk around India as homeless wondering monks. Never staying in one place more then 3 days. Eating only what is offered. Only going inside during the monsoon season. I tend to agree, to dangerous !!!

There may be some exceptions but in general, not all have strong mind

Your teacher would be the best to answer this question.

@ratikala

Nice story :namaste

Aum

 

[ratikala]

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!

deffinately the best solution ,

... well not drop the books , but most certainly the come worship with me :namaste

I understand the benifit of book distribution , but I do not understand the reasoning behind distributing out side another denominations temple ???
books should be distributed to school librarys, hospitals , prisons places where people may be in need of some answers to life .

it is very sad that from the outside people can perceive them to be agressive and pushy this was not the original intention behind book distribution , srila prabhupada's attitude was ..."ever your well wisher " .... ever your freind .

 

[Amrut]

... well not drop the books , but most certainly the come worship with me :namaste

I understand the benifit of book distribution , but I do not understand the reasoning behind distributing out side another denominations temple ???
books should be distributed to school librarys, hospitals , prisons places where people may be in need of some answers to life .

it is very sad that from the outside people can perceive them to be agressive and pushy this was not the original intention behind book distribution , srila prabhupada's attitude was ..."ever your well wisher " .... ever your freind .

Distributing books is never s good option. One needs to be qualified to read them. All books like Gita and Prakarana granths have qualifications.

Guru never initiates. Disciple comes to Guru and asks question. River never changes path and flows towards thirsty. Person who wants to drink water has to go to the river. River does not stop nor does it change it's course. It is not the nature of river.

If knowledge is given to unworthy, impure mind then the result can be destructive.

The word deserving is mis-leading. It only includes ability and not nature.

If a Guru has 2 disciples, one who is not so sharp but big hearted, loyal and faithful and another who can grasp anything in first attempt, but is not good natured, whom will Guru give updesha?

If you talk about just ability, then even Ravan had great ability. What's the difference between Rama nad Ravana, abilitwise.

Ravan was, dharmagya, shastragya, ayurvedacharya, vimanshastri, great jyotish shastri, tapasvi, param bhakta of Shiva and ruled all 3 worlds. Has fame and his Lanka was made of Gold.

But still what is he called, a rAkshasa? The difference is Ego.

Even terrorists have ability, skill, disciple, management, devotion and loyalty. Should nuclear and bio weapons technology be given to them?

So now who will decide that the buyer is a good natured or not and that his mind is pure enough to grasp subtle trusts.

Now-a-days there is a big worm inside us to S P R E A D. I strongly dis-agree with this worm.

Blind leading Blind. Now there are different paths, all true but for people with different mindsets. Now how will you know whether bhakti and that too gaudiya bhakti suits you and not Yog? There id navnath sampradaya. If there was only one God, one way to worship, one path, then things would have been easier. Do you (people spreading the work) have ability to judge. To they have inner eye to penetrate deep within the questioner and judge what is right for him or her.

Only Sad Guru can judge, as he has got this inner eye.

Now-a-days, everything is available on net, and many things for free. Even brahma sutra bhasya is freely available and uploader feels proud of his efforts and that too he is giving it for F R E E. Is brahma sutra for masses?

I have heard that only first 4 verses are explained, rest all are to be decoded by disciple himself. He should have thorough knowledge of upanishads before he touches Brahma sutra. It is only for highly intelligent.

One sanyasi was saying that after serving his guru for 4 years, he was only told first half verse of Brahma sutra.

Sorry, but I strongly disagree this spreading philosophy, be it done by any path or any Guru.

Aum

 

[Vinayaka]

Sorry, but I strongly disagree this spreading philosophy, be it done by any path or any Guru.

Aum

I concur. It has "I'm right and you're wrong," written all over it. To make available is a different story, and the internet is a great resource. Of course not everyone has access, but there are libraries. As you know, in some Indian states, Christian proseltysing is is banned legally, and this includes distribution of religious literature.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram amrut ji :namaste

Distributing books is never s good option. One needs to be qualified to read them. All books like Gita and Prakarana granths have qualifications.

personaly I share your feelings it is a sacred text , we were taught that the word itself is nondifferent from god , therefore the book it self should be respected , it should never be put in an unclean place or placed on the floor , for that reason if it is distributed without care people will throw it down any where without respect not knowing the correct way to read it or keep it respectfully .

here in england so many copys of the gita and bagavatam end up in charity shops and junk sales which to me is very wrong , why give it to someone who doesnot value it ? .... If you give it to a person who will dissrespect it , you might as well be dissrespectiong it yourself , ... you will not help that person only cause them to commit an offence .

in our temple we used to once yearly hold a gita reading where the guru and all qualified members of the comunity(initiates) recite the gita in full on this day copies of the gita are sponcered , these were to be given to school librarys , librarys and any proper place who will be happy to take them and use them for the correct purpose . some are taken by the comunity to be given to family members and freinds who will read them properly along side their study program in the temple . the guru allways recomends the comunity to read a little of the gita every day . but this comunity knows how to respect the gita and follows the gurus instructions and listens to regular teachings , this is the correct way .

Guru never initiates. Disciple comes to Guru and asks question. River never changes path and flows towards thirsty. Person who wants to drink water has to go to the river. River does not stop nor does it change it's course. It is not the nature of river.

If knowledge is given to unworthy, impure mind then the result can be destructive.

yes , as it is either used for the wrong reason , or it inflates the ego many times both .

If a Guru has 2 disciples, one who is not so sharp but big hearted, loyal and faithful and another who can grasp anything in first attempt, but is not good natured, whom will Guru give updesha?

the good natured :namaste he is pure hearted

If you talk about just ability, then even Ravan had great ability. What's the difference between Rama nad Ravana, abilitwise.

Ravan was, dharmagya, shastragya, ayurvedacharya, vimanshastri, great jyotish shastri, tapasvi, param bhakta of Shiva and ruled all 3 worlds. Has fame and his Lanka was made of Gold.

But still what is he called, a rAkshasa? The difference is Ego.

:namaste yes , his motivation was wrong .

Even terrorists have ability, skill, disciple, management, devotion and loyalty. Should nuclear and bio weapons technology be given to them?

but missplaced he has loyalty to the wrong person to the adharmi

So now who will decide that the buyer is a good natured or not and that his mind is pure enough to grasp subtle trusts.

Now-a-days there is a big worm inside us to S P R E A D. I strongly dis-agree with this worm.

do you mean for traditions to expand ? ...
in this case I think I agree , ... one can attract many devotees if you have a very beautifull big temple , but the devotees that will be atracted are very different to the devotees that are attracted by the small simple temple .

Blind leading Blind. Now there are different paths, all true but for people with different mindsets. Now how will you know whether bhakti and that too gaudiya bhakti suits you and not Yog? There id navnath sampradaya. If there was only one God, one way to worship, one path, then things would have been easier. Do you (people spreading the work) have ability to judge. To they have inner eye to penetrate deep within the questioner and judge what is right for him or her.

and yes there are many arguements in some traditions because there is not enough direct teaching from the guru , and because they will accept many deciples who are prehaps not truely the right deciples , and because there is money coming from the donations of large congregations and people are fooled in to thinking that big is good , which is not allways so .

Only Sad Guru can judge, as he has got this inner eye.

:namaste

and asd guru is not caring for the size and splendor of the temple , he is looking into the heart .

Now-a-days, everything is available on net, and many things for free. Even brahma sutra bhasya is freely available and uploader feels proud of his efforts and that too he is giving it for F R E E. Is brahma sutra for masses?

I have heard that only first 4 verses are explained, rest all are to be decoded by disciple himself. He should have thorough knowledge of upanishads before he touches Brahma sutra. It is only for highly intelligent.

before you get to read many texts the guru is teaching , he is giving the key with which you must unlock the meaning contained within , only when the guru thinks you are ready , then he will give the next teaching .

to give the teaching at the wrong time is like pouring water into a bucket with many holes .

Sorry, but I strongly disagree this spreading philosophy, be it done by any path or any Guru.

I agree with you very much , especialy with the spreading of knowledge or philosophy , it is causing so many arguements and so much ahamkara , especialy what we have here via the internet , people are becoming so full of knowledge but with very little understanding , .....for me this is prehaps why I tend towards bhakti , it is my relationship with god , I am not interested in aquiring knowledge . I am happy with simple serva , through serva I am gaining experience , through experience comes understanding . there is no need to prove knowledge through debate , no need to collect philosophies no aham to prove .

in much the same way , guru gives serva when he knows you are ready , and he gives instructions as to how to serve , how to understand that serva .

 

[nameless]

Hindus what is your opinion on Srila Prabhupada ?

i respect him for some of his works, still i consider him as a moron.

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

i respect him for some of his works, still i consider him as a moron.

People say the same thing for Movie Stars. Same thing for basketball players and Republicans rap musicians, and news reporters.

Funny how familiar that sounds. There something very common place about this thought.

Is it that so many people say the same thing for so many 'role models'?

Is it that so many people say the same thing for Politicians?
Prabhupad didn't want to meddle in politics. Prabhupad was way old school.

Btw I first learnt the word Moron from bugs bunny. Bugs pronounced it 'Mah-roon'. Anyone remember that?

When will all the Moron-ery stop?

 

[vistascan]

One sanyasi was saying that after serving his guru for 4 years, he was only told first half verse of Brahma sutra.

First half verse? So only "athatho"?

 

[Twilight]

here in england so many copys of the gita and bagavatam end up in charity shops and junk sales which to me is very wrong , why give it to someone who doesnot value it ? .... If you give it to a person who will dissrespect it , you might as well be dissrespectiong it yourself , ... you will not help that person only cause them to commit an offence .

Namaste Ratikala :namaste

I found my copy of the gita in a charity shop. Maybe people who take their unwanted Bhagavad Gitas to the charity shop are not committing an offence as such. They are distributing too and giving donations to charity at the same time Even if they do not realise the result of their action there is one all the same.

:namaste

 

[ratikala]

Namaste Ratikala :namaste

I found my copy of the gita in a charity shop. Maybe people who take their unwanted Bhagavad Gitas to the charity shop are not committing an offence as such. They are distributing too and giving donations to charity at the same time Even if they do not realise the result of their action there is one all the same.

:namaste

namaskaram :namaste

I am glad you found one and gave it a good home , no , it is not so bad if they are at least put on a shelf in the hope someone will be glad of it , but in truth a copy of the gita or similar shastra should be kept in a revered place .
the person giving it away wouldnt even realise that it is an offence to treat it any different to any ordinary book , so the offence is not realy theirs .
the fault realy lays with giving a sacred book too freely .

krsna devotees should know that krsnas word is synonomous with krsna himself , that is why it should be carefully treated and respected .:namaste

 

[Amrut]

First half verse? So only "athatho"?

I have never studied Brahmasutras. that was what Swamiji had told in Gita discourse. Mostly it was Athato Brahma JiGYAsA - don't know if it is half or not, but thats what I remember. It might be the first line of verse. I have a copy of Brahma sutra, but I am not allowed to read it.

Aum

 

[vistascan]

I have never studied Brahmasutras. that was what Swamiji had told in Gita discourse. Mostly it was Athato Brahma JiGYAsA - don't know if it is half or not, but thats what I remember. It might be the first line of verse. I have a copy of Brahma sutra, but I am not allowed to read it.

Aum

Good. I had no guidance regarding the matter, so I actually started with an online version of the Brahma Sutra,

Luckily it was pointed out that the Brahma Sutra was the very last text usually taught to disciples, so I backed off and read simpler texts like drig-drisya-viveka, though those too don't do much without chittasuddhi

 

[Amrut]

Good. I had no guidance regarding the matter, so I actually started with an online version of the Brahma Sutra,

Luckily it was pointed out that the Brahma Sutra was the very last text usually taught to disciples, so I backed off and read simpler texts like drig-drisya-viveka, though those too don't do much without chittasuddhi

Advaita does require chittashuddhi. Renunciation is the pre-requisite to meditate on OM or do Self Enquiry. But Advaita does not reject dvaita. It only asks one to rise above it.

It is negation and not rejection. Actual negation is experienced only in the state of Nirvikalp Samadhi. Please remember, Advaita sthiti is different than Advaita way of approach. One can reach advaita sthiti by following dvaita and then shifting to advaita or when you have divine vision of God, then God will one day lift you to Nirvikalp Samadhi. Even by Yog, one can achieve Advaita Sthiti. The only difference between other paths and advaita is that Advaita is the direct approach. But the destination is same, as truth is same no matter how you reach it, say the result is same if you dive into ocean or are pushed into ocean. The result is you are in ocean (of bliss)

So one may practice idol worship, pray to God or even paramatman (formless God) to show the way, and one day you will be ready to practice the advaita way. This exercise is already done by pure minds either in this or past lives, hence they are born with pure mind not wanting anything from this world. What is important is to move from where we are. Progress is more important, efforts are more important. It all depends upon God's grace, so keep praying to show the correct path and keep moksha as the only goal in life.

EDIT: Tatva Bodh explains basics of Advaita

Aum
Amrut

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

difference between other paths and advaita is that Advaita is the direct approach. But the destination is same, as truth is same no matter how you reach it, say the result is same if you dive into ocean or are pushed into ocean. The result is you are in ocean (of bliss)

not wanting anything from this world.

Leave this world to float in an ocean? Metaphorically?

Where is the precise destination being pointing to?

Advaita describes a logical conclusion. It doesn't seem to qualify as being called a 'Religion'.
Imo Advaita is not a subject matter. Imo metaphorically speaking, advaita is a rule of mathmatics, not a goal. Advaita is a stepping stone to renunuciation. What is done after that renunciation is 'service'. Imo advaita is logical for logical people and it is not goal. Advaita is like learning the rules of business (like being a lawyer), but imo it is not the goal of life. The merit earned by devotional vocation and service required a preliminary awakening to the advaita-state of the world.

jai sri krsna!

 

[Amrut]

Leave this world to float in an ocean? Metaphorically?

Where is the precise destination being pointing to?

Advaita describes a logical conclusion. It doesn't seem to qualify as being called a 'Religion'.
Imo Advaita is not a subject matter. Imo metaphorically speaking, advaita is a rule of mathmatics, not a goal. Advaita is a stepping stone to renunuciation. What is done after that renunciation is 'service'. Imo advaita is logical for logical people and it is not goal. Advaita is like learning the rules of business (like being a lawyer), but imo it is not the goal of life. The merit earned by devotional vocation and service required a preliminary awakening to the advaita-state of the world.

jai sri krsna!

Calm down Mohini ji

Please do not jump into conclusion. To understand advaita, one has to live the way. Please do not use heavy words like religion etc to this moron. For me, Advaita is a way of life. It does not reject dvaita. It asks us (purified minds) to rise above dvaita, as said in upanishads.

where science and logic terminates, spirituality begins

Analysis is a good thing, but it comes within the realm of mind and advaita takes one above mind.

Advaita marg (path) and advaita sthiti (non dual srtate) are different.

One can reach advaita sthiti by practicing

1. Advaita marg - OM, Neti - Neti (Self Enquiry), Who Am I, contemplating on mahavakyas

2. yog (union of atman (to be taken as jiva) and paramatman (same as atman or brahman of upanishad), Shakti or tantrik sadhana

3. It can also be reached via path of bhakti as in case of Narsimh Mehta, Swami Ramsukhdasji Maharaj.

Advaita Sthiti is surely a goal and not just dry philosophy or dry logic, though it uses logic.

Seva (service), karma kand is only for purification. Devotion is necessary and base of spirituality, be it any path. Without devotion, Jnana is useless / baseless. Without Jnana, bhakti is meaningless, as you should know how to do worship. Though bhakti has an edge, as by mere chanting of a mantra, one can be purified and can even get vision of beloved deity.

Bhagavan in Gita says that out of 4 bhaktas, Jnani bhakta is the best (he is my atman). So Jnani is a bhakta, who does ananya bhakti

a+anya
not+different

Hence one who meditates on brahman, which bhava, I am brahman' reaches brahman.

Bhagavan's 'Me' and 'I' can be taken as Brahman. It will be a long discussion and I do not want to enter it, but have collected some verses.

Bhagavan in Anu Gita also says the same thing.

And, O Dhanañjaya! it is not possible for me to repeat in full (what I said before). For that doctrine was perfectly adequate for understanding the seat, of the Brahman. It is not possible for me to state it again in full in that way. For then accompanied by my mystic power, I declared to you the Supreme Brahman.

Different paths will sing glories of their path, which is not wrong. They will also sing glories of their God and will quote from shastras which will authenticate that their God of worship is the supreme.

We cannot come to a conclusion, if we keep thinking from practical standpoint. One has to meditate and dive deep withing to gather pearls of wisdom (Jnana), being on surface and counting waves thinking as they are different from ocean would not help much. At depths, there is no such thing as wave. If one meditates regularly, then one can know our mind as it reflects only in meditation.

After abiding in non-dual state, one can still stay in this world and live upon intuition.

Hope we do not start yet another shastra yuddha.

If advaita does not suit you, just leave it. Dvaita and VA are fine

Aum
Amrut

 

[mohinishaktidevi]

To understand advaita, one has to live the way.

What is an example of not living the advaita way?

What I said is Advaita is the required stepping stone to full out bhakti

"Devotional Service" (Seva bhakti) begins after an awakening to the advaita-state of the world.

I wrote "advaita-state is the of the world."
I dont see how this conflicts with your statements.

Srila Prabhupada certainly had a strict stance on Advaita which would be found in his translation and purports of bhagavad-gita, which suits me well.

 

[vistascan]

What is an example of not living the advaita way?

What I said is Advaita is the required stepping stone to full out bhakti


I wrote "advaita-state is the of the world."
I dont see how this conflicts with your statements.

Srila Prabhupada certainly had a strict stance on Advaita which would be found in his translation and purports of bhagavad-gita, which suits me well.

I disagree. The idea that Advaita is without Bhakti is totally wrong. Bhakti is actually required in Advaita as well. For example, Sri Ramakrishna, perhaps one of the greatest representations of Bhakti, couldn't achieve nirvikalpa samadhi due to his bhakti for the Goddess. He required an Advaita teacher to show him the final experience. But that didn't mean that Sri Ramakrishna suddenly lost all his bhakti.

 

[Amrut]

What is an example of not living the advaita way?

What I said is Advaita is the required stepping stone to full out bhakti


I wrote "advaita-state is the of the world."
I dont see how this conflicts with your statements.

Srila Prabhupada certainly had a strict stance on Advaita which would be found in his translation and purports of bhagavad-gita, which suits me well.

If Srila Prabhupada's views suits you, then you can neglect advaita.

An e.g. of not living an advaita way would be difficult. But if the goal is not nirvikalp samadhi,which is considered at highest by Sri Adi Shankara, then one is not living advaita way. Advaita does not rejects dvaita, but asks one to rise above it. So karma kand and devotional services are important for purification. To enjoy Lila and to have divine vision of God, one is still in dvaita and hence it is not a final state, according to advaita, as individuality is not lost. So advaita asks one to even renounce this ego of bhakta and enter into non-dual state. Ashtavakra Gita says this. Even Guru Gita says that meditating on nirguna brahman and being initiated into mahavakya - I am That is considered as supreme. I could quote verses if requested, though I will not quote from ashtavakra gita as it is not for masses. After entering non-dual state, one has to be steady in that state. Only after repeated entering into samadhi, mind is destroyed. After that one does not need to meditate anymore. Sri Ramana Maharshi called this as sahaj samadhi. After meditation is complete one can see that this world is not different from brahman - sarvam khalu-idam brahman. But not all can come back from nirvikalp samadhi. After 21 days, Sri Ramakrishna says, body drops permanently. Hence Jivan-muktas are very very rare. So experiencing divine lila or seeing Krishna everywhere is not experienced by all, though on can see the same divinity everywhere, but not the form of any form may bee seen.

Even in dvaita sadhana, as in case of Sri Ramakrishna, he had divine vision of Maa Kali, but that was not 24 x 7. So he meditated hard to be always with her. After intense meditation, he would have repeated visions and gradually the effort needed to have divine vision decreased and the frequency of visions of maa kali increased until he no more needed to meditate.

In advaita, 5 senses and relations are considered to be like poisonous serpents and are to be avoided, but in case of dvaita 5 senses are used to enjoy lila and perform devotional services.

After advaita experience and coming back o this world, one is free from ego. One only keeps pseudo ego just to be loosely clinged to body. One does not wish anything, but without any resistance, and 100 % surrender, follows divine plan, let it make Jnana a good guy or a bad guy. So there is no want and there is total surrender, just like Krishna's Flute. This is why, Jnani is the best devotee and not dear to Lord Krishna (Bhagavan)

Definition of bhakti is not just what is said from vaishnav POV

1. Surrender of Ego to SELF is real Bhakti - Sri Ramana Maharshi
2. I am not different from Brahman and other mahavakyas is also a way to contemplate.

Advaita is only for pure mind. Bhakti is stepping stone for advaita, though one can progress on pure bhakti, but according to advaita final state is non-dual

Sri Ramakrishna said, once Rama asked Hanuman, 'how do you see me'
Hanuman answered

From sarira bhava I am your servent and you are my swami (God)
From Jiva Bhava I am ansh (part) and you are whole
But from Tatva Jnana (Jnana Drishti), I am you and you are me, we are not different, we are the same.

Anyways, continue to follow what suits you. Good luck.

Aum

 

[Amrut]

I disagree. The idea that Advaita is without Bhakti is totally wrong. Bhakti is actually required in Advaita as well. For example, Sri Ramakrishna, perhaps one of the greatest representations of Bhakti, couldn't achieve nirvikalpa samadhi due to his bhakti for the Goddess. He required an Advaita teacher to show him the final experience. But that didn't mean that Sri Ramakrishna suddenly lost all his bhakti.

+ 1 Advaita is important to be realized. Advaita is not a negative state, but as Yog Vasistha says, as one is free from desires and contemplates on Brahman with bhava - i am not different from Brahman or to meditate on mantra and later on source of mantra OM, bliss increases.

Bhakti in required for advaita, but advaitin does not sing and dance in estacy, and there are no waves of bhakti, but experiences peace and bliss constantly. Advaita depends upon grace of God. Shanti is also a bhava - shanta bhava

Aum