|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 31, 2009 14:17:48 GMT -6
Wow I am amazed at the lengths you guys are willing to go to keep your skewed view of the facts. " But you have not found bhakti yet". Not found bhakti yet?! And how in a world would you know that? If this is a sample of your method of receiving and distributing knowledge, I must say, I am in shock. But not surprised. Not surprised at all. I think I can tell for myself wheather I have a certain sentiment in my heart or not. You could at least have said "you may have not found bhakti yet". But to make an affirmative statement as you do without even knowing whom you are talking to, thats awkward, to say the least. Not to mention its just down right abusive. Abusive as in patronizing and pushing someone down and using contempt and basically calling that person (whome you don't even know) incapable of thinking and even feeling for himself. This alleged real linage link you talk about - it doesn't seem to do much for the allegedly really-linage-linked person after all. You sound even more cetemptive of individuals than IGM has ever managed. So I say lets wrap this grand conversation up, shall we? I'm sorry if I offended you. It wasn't my intention. But I wasn't going to lie to you as your gurus and cohorts have in the past. If you don't want to hear the truth, don't ask. Bhakti is not some cheap thing that anybody can have from anywhere. It is a rare and beautiful gift. It when fully grown brings Krsna under one's control. It overpowers and controls even God. And its sources are ultimately mysterious as even Sri Jiva admits (as you would know if you read our book called the Nectar of the Holy Name). So, there is a very very slim possibility that you have bhakti, but that is made even more unlikely given your obvious IGM background. People who thing they already have something are unlikely to go looking for it. This was Socrates problem in his dialogues. Where would you have gotten it from? Your reaction has proved beyond a doubt that you have no bhakti. If you had had any bhakti, you would have admitted that you had no bhakti. What you do have is an enormous ego. Was it you who warned me about my ego? If so, you might just consider taking your own good advice. Bhakti is not the same as having as having some sentiments in your heart. Bhakti is a special, transformative power of God. It is as Baladeva ( Siddhanta-ratna, para 40)has defined it basing himself on the works of Sri Sanatana and Sri Rupa and Sri Jiva: tathA ca hlAdasamvidoH samavetayoH sAro bhaktiH, "Bhakti is the essential core or essence of the pleasure-giving power and the knowledge-giving power inseparably joined together." These are the svarUpa-zaktis of Sri Krsna. One doesn't just find these lying around. I know it is hard for you to accept the fact that IGM has no empowered connection with authentic CV. It came as a huge shock to me when Dr. Kapoor revealed it to me over thirty years ago. My head was spinning for days and weeks. Eventually, though, we I calmed down and thought about it, it made perfect sense to me. If the door to the inner world is closed and locked, it is natural to turn outside and concern oneself with building empires, making temples, books, and disciples by the busload. I can't tell you how many times I sat in Bhaktivedanta's presence and listened to him brag about his achievements to various visitors whom he wanted to impress. He had a huge ego, that should have tipped me off. But I was a blind follower at that point. Anyway, I am not going to lie to you to keep your feelings from being hurt. Sorry. You will have to go to IGM for that. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 31, 2009 14:54:51 GMT -6
So that previous comment was kind of strongomotional so let me elaborate a bit (still, stand by those words). What is this problem most of us westerners find ourselves in after 25 to near 40 years of what we call KC? We are told our lineage is not a 'real one'. That certainly is a problem if bhakti indeed requires such. But then we also find that the so called real lineages have not given us anything whatsoever in the way of a chance. Not in the beginning, not after all these years. That is is the problem with the tradition. In the beginning there was no one out there other than IGM. And still today, we are wished to hell if we so much show some signs of memes post indonctrinacion (as if memes does not happen with the traditonalists as well, just leave at Radhakunda for a while...). In the West what is available for us AND for newcomers is the same: nearly nothing. Where is the outreach? Where are the real bhakti outlets around the world to make all the difference? Truly the silence id deafening. So, the real question and the one that has been obviously diverted is this: the problem is not that bhakti requires a physical line alone, but a physical line is required ALONG WITH a certain frame of consciousness. If that certain state is missing, then the physical line alone is inactive. Moreover, the alleged 'problem' on both sides is highly debateable if we are willing to acknowledge that there actually is a connection between IGM and the traditional lines. There is a link there if we are willing to see it that way. So what we really ought to be concerned with is an expanded understanding of bhakti itself before attempting to present it to the world. Telling a fellow bhakta "you have not found bhakti yet", my god, who really has? You want to wrap up this conversation, but you still want to talk? Oh well, go ahead and vent some more then. I am really a sympathetic listener (though it might not seem that way to you. I am, after all, taking time away from other important work to respond to you.), but I am not going to bend the truth for you to keep your feelings from being hurt. How can I acknowledge something that is clearly not there? This connection between IGM and CV? If you want to define bhakti in your own way, fine. I prefer to stick to the classical definitions of Sri Rupa and Sanatana. Bhakti has always been rare. It will never become a common thing. If you say that you have bhakti, great! More power to you! But I think you are deluding yourself and everyone you tell that to. What I can say about myself is that I have the seed of bhakti, raw, uncultivated, undeveloped. I got it from someone who did have bhakti. That doesn't make me better than you, just luckier, perhaps. If, however, I fail to take full advantage of that before I die (and, frankly, I haven't been doing too well so far) then I will have wasted an extraordinary and rare opportunity and would deserve everyone's censure and condemnation. That is what I fear more than your condemnation for attempting to tell you the truth. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 31, 2009 14:55:56 GMT -6
Telling a fellow bhakta "you have not found bhakti yet", my god, who really has?Or hasn't? Yeah, right! An even more delusional being. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitya on May 31, 2009 19:49:23 GMT -6
So much for the academic...  Well Nitai das, since you choose to ignore the other person's points only repeating yours, lets just call it a day. Have a nice one. |
|
|
|
Post by Nityananda on May 31, 2009 20:00:38 GMT -6
I don't believe you are telling me the truth. You may believe it to be the truth, for your own comfort, but I see inconsistencies in your presentation AND your attitude.
Ironically your attitude is so much like IGM, even as you attack them, that I see less and less reasons to believe there isn't a connection between the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 31, 2009 21:08:49 GMT -6
So much for the academic... Well Nitai das, since you choose to ignore the other person's points only repeating yours, lets just call it a day. Have a nice one. What points? There are no points there. Just silly egotistic ravings. Not a point worth discussing anywhere in it. If you can point out one point worth addressing, I will address it. Otherwise, I have better things to do with my time. I think I see the problem in this discourse, however. You expect me to be trying to attract you to authentic CV and draw you in. You think that I should want you to belong to my religion, and that, therefore, I should be smoothing your ruffled feathers and patting you on the back and telling you want a great guy/gal you are and how great it would be if you joined us. But I don't want you and people like you to be in my religion. I don't want idiots who think that bhakti is easy and cheap to be any where near me or in any way associated with CV. Who wants jerks who think they are entitled to have bhakti at the snap of their fingers, who think they are entitled to anything and everything even up to and including respect. We are entitled to nothing. So why don't you go and become a Christian. That is easy and cheap. Or better still become a Muslim. All you need is to recite the Shahada in front of other Muslims and you are in. That is cheap and easy. And think of those beautiful Houris who await you in Paradise, 72 perfect and flawless women who satisfy your every wish. That will put some feelings in your heart. That is more for you. Go be a Muslim and leave us alone. You're really not wanted here. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jun 1, 2009 9:39:15 GMT -6
So you say you have bhakti. Great! Case closed. Just keep doing what you have been doing. Maybe IGM isn't as lame as I think it is. Anything else? Otherwise, good luck!
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon on Jun 1, 2009 12:00:29 GMT -6
The points are: 1) There is a connection between IGM and the tradition, even a physical one. 2) Our own understanding of Bhakti must be expanded, not only to benefit the world at large, but to preserve the tradition itself. This of course does not mean the Gosvamis did not have a complete understanding of bhakti and therefore need our interfering, but it means we cannot expect a static perception of bhakti to be functional. The very definition of bhakti implies that it has to grow. It must accomodate the needs of the moment. This is where its highly possible that, even as bhakti is a rare thing, that it does not lay cheaply around, yet it is widely available and easy to procure as per the mercy of Caitanya Mahaprabhu - his gift precisely.
Thus I humbly still don't see in any of your own words or in any of the quotes you presented, a proof that bhakti is not a 'sentiment in the heart'. Even a seed of bhakti is bhakti.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jun 1, 2009 12:52:14 GMT -6
The points are: 1) There is a connection between IGM and the tradition, even a physical one. 2) Our own understanding of Bhakti must be expanded, not only to benefit the world at large, but to preserve the tradition itself. This of course does not mean the Gosvamis did not have a complete understanding of bhakti and therefore need our interfering, but it means we cannot expect a static perception of bhakti to be functional. The very definition of bhakti implies that it has to grow. It must accomodate the needs of the moment. This is where its highly possible that, even as bhakti is a rare thing, that it does not lay cheaply around, yet it is widely available and easy to procure as per the mercy of Caitanya Mahaprabhu - his gift precisely. Thus I humbly still don't see in any of your own words or in any of the quotes you presented, a proof that bhakti is not a 'sentiment in the heart'. Even a seed of bhakti is bhakti. Well, I can't help you with that first one. It is not just me. Everyone knows that IGM is not physically connected or, connected by initiation, to CV. The only people who are in the dark are the IGMers. because they are warned against going out and mixing with other Vaisnavas. I interviewed dozens of folks about this when I was still trying to determine if it was true and they all told me the same thing. I was amazed at how such a basic thing had been kept from us for so long. Even today you can ask anyone, any Goswami, any Babaji, any householder who is a member of the mainstream tradition and they will all tell you the same thing. It is common knowledge outside of IGM. So you can say that all day until you are blue in the face and it won't come true. This basis fact is that IGM is not connected by initiation to the CV tradition. It is connected in other ways, maybe less flattering but still connected. It is connected by the relationship of imitation, the mainstream tradition being the imitated and IGM the imitator. It is a good imitation and imitation is always a form of praise, so we can think of it in positive terms. It is also related by personnel, may of those who were formerly in IGM have moved on the mainstream CV. Those who haven't have mostly tended to fall away from CV altogether. Some of those who have moved on to the mainstream continue to think and act as they did in IGM (sadly). For them it was not such a dramatic upheaval. So there are many relationships and connections between IGM and CV, but not that one that you are calling physical. More of a mental or imaginative (imaginary?) relationship. Now about the understanding of bhakti needing to be expanded, I am not sure what you mean. It seems to assume that we are starting with a common understanding of bhakti, but I don't think that is the case. It is not about expanding our understanding, it is about arriving at an understanding that is authentic, that is, not made up in someone's head for convenience's sake. For arriving at a genuine understanding of bhakti we have to rely on those who have done the most thorough job of defining and describing it. Without starting from that fundamental understanding, there is no question of expanding it. I am not sure we (largely you, but me too) have reached that fundamental understanding yet. I never said that bhakti does not manifest in the heart as a feeling, but it is a feeling unlike any other feeling we have ever had or are likely to ever have. It different from every other feeling, even feelings that have as their objects Radha and Krsna. Not every feeling that seems to be about Krsna is bhakti. Bhakti is infused into us from outside. It is a kind of possession-state. That much is clear from Sri Rupa's discussion. Are you familiar with that discussion? Can you give me the gist of that so we know we are on the same page? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2009 16:29:31 GMT -6
I agree that first one has to arrive at an understanding of bhakti before we can expand our understanding of it, that is common sense. Expanding and arriving are complimentary and continue on until situated in prema-bhakti.
When a person first realizes that the goal of life is to attain prema-bhakti; they have arrived at an understanding of bhakti as the goal of life. As they become educated on how to attain prema-bhakti -- they expand their understanding of bhakti. As they progress through the stages of bhakti-yoga they arrive at higher levels of self-awareness while expanding their knowledge of Bhagavat tattva and bhakti-rasa.
I think you are being too humble here. Without understanding what bhakti is you would never have taken up the practice of bhakti-sadhana with any seriousness and continued on for any length of time. People who take up bhakti-yoga without understanding the purpose and goal take up bhakti-yoga for various other purposes; and those types of bhakti-yogis are not uncommon.
Still, the most basic level of teaching about bhakti-yoga is in describing the purpose and goal of bhakti-yoga; which we have all been exposed to and is easy to understand: the most basic purpose and goal of bhakti is to develop love and devotion towards Radha-Krishna. Bhakti means devotional love. Not just the emotion of loving someone, but also the activities of a loving relationship where you seek to please the beloved. The highest type of bhakti is devotional love without any other motivation than love, that is, without the motivation for rewards or self-improvement: selfless devotion motivated out of love alone.
Bhakti (devotional love) and rati or bhava (emotional feelings) are two distinct but interconnected things. Bhakti first manifests to our understanding when we are given knowledge of and understand our innate ontological relationship with Sri Krishna.
When we understand that we are the eternal tatastha-sakti of Sri Krishna, and that the purpose of our life is prema-bhakti; that is an understanding of our ontological position, and goal of life. Then we know what we are destined for and need to strive to attain.
Depending on your level of bhakti your emotional state will vary. For example: when you first understand and realize the purpose and goal of life as prema-bhakti, you may feel emotions of love and gratitude, you may feel different types of bliss due to understanding your eternal position as part of the awesome eternal mercy of Sri Krishna. When you expand your knowledge of how to internally relate with Sri Krishna (by following in the footsteps of Krishna's nitya-parishads) and take up that practice, then your bhakti will change from being just about emotions of awe and gratitude with the introduction of familiarity. Emotional feelings like those of friends and lovers takes over, with awe and gratitude taking a back seat to more intimacy.
Yes, but there are stages and levels of that infusion and possession-state. The first stage is very different from the final stages. The infusion and possession-state of a sadhana-bhakta is very different from a bhava-bhakta. The sadhana-bhakta is still unconscious of the true nature of the Self and the self, he may or may not understand it from a perspective of knowledge, but definitely not from experience. The possession-state of a bhava-bhakta involves direct interaction and awareness of Krishna's presence from within and all around, whereas for sadhana-bhaktas it lacks that and is more about expressions of emotional states rather than direct interaction. Lacking that experience the nature of his infusion and possession-state is categorically different from that of a bhava-bhakta.
The basic argument you are making about there being no real connection to CV in IGM certainly has validity, but only insofar in that they are presenting many wrongheaded conceptions about bhakti. They say bhakti is all about ABC, when really it is about XYZ. They twist sastra in order to gain followers willing to dedicate themselves to serving them. Still, there is harinam, there is the sastra with the sanskrit, and they serve as a gateway to the wider world of bhakti and sastra for most people -- including all of us. So in that sense there is a real connection to CV, although it's like the asuras in possession of amrita.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deva on Jun 2, 2009 12:13:27 GMT -6
As to the connection by initiation, in this regard what there is in reality is a dispute over it being a fact or not, with not actual proof from either side. If I say there is a connection and you say there isn't, it has obviously become a matter of opinion, i.e. sentiment. Even the fact that the many gosvamis etc. you interviewed say there isn't a connection, this is still no proof of there not being one. What is a fact is that the tradition has not, according to it's opinion of a no connection, reached out to rescue those it believes misguided by this alleged no proper link. One thing is for sure, one characteristic of bhakti is compassion, and we are still waiting, doing the best under the circumstances, but hearing that the only disciplic succession we know is not good, let me tell you, is counterproductive. People seek out their own level of competence and their own limits. They then are granted faith in that, as Krishna says in the Gita (7.21). Compassion brings them over their limits.
As to the connection being compared to 'assuras in possession of amrta', this type of statement is just pure stupid, unecessary b.s. The connection is there, bhakti is there, and where there is bhakti, there is every possibility of auspiciousness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jun 2, 2009 12:44:13 GMT -6
As to the connection by initiation, in this regard what there is in reality is a dispute over it being a fact or not, with not actual proof from either side. If I say there is a connection and you say there isn't, it has obviously become a matter of opinion, i.e. sentiment. Even the fact that the many gosvamis etc. you interviewed say there isn't a connection, this is still no proof of there not being one. What is a fact is that the tradition has not, according to it's opinion of a no connection, reached out to rescue those it believes misguided by this alleged no proper link. One thing is for sure, one characteristic of bhakti is compassion, and we are still waiting, doing the best under the circumstances, but hearing that the only disciplic succession we know is not good, let me tell you, is counterproductive. People seek out their own level of competence and their own limits. They then are granted faith in that, as Krishna says in the Gita (7.21). Compassion brings them over their limits. As to the connection being compared to 'assuras in possession of amrta', this type of statement is just pure stupid, unecessary b.s. The connection is there, bhakti is there, and where there is bhakti, there is every possibility of auspiciousness. Well now you are speaking purely out of ignorance. The tradition constantly reaches out to those of us trapped in the IGM compound. Look at the way Dr. Kapoor reached out to me. I have no idea how many others he reached out to and it was not just him. I was introduced to numerous mainstream Vaisnavas who were all very sympathetic and forthright with me. I did not feel I was being looked down up and the best thing is that the traditional Vaisnavas were and are quite willing to give real initiation to those of us from IGM who want it. Look at how many have sought and received genuine initiation. I think Advaita Das was maintaining a list at some point. I last saw it years ago and it was already in the hundreds. There is really no dispute about whether Bhaktisiddhanta was initiated or not. Even many members of IGM knew it. I maintain the Sridhar Swami knew it and accepted it, but refused to humble himself (not that anyone was demanding that) before the authentic community and correct the problem. If you read some of his writings carefully and take note of the implied subtexts, this will become evident. Moreover, just look at what is going on here. Am I not reaching out to you and your buddies? But it is a dangerous thing to do in some cases. Look at how unpleasant your reaction has been. It is one thing to be compassionate, but to have someone throw one's gift back in one's face is hard to swallow, even for saints, which I most certainly I am not. The fact is that Bhaktisiddhanta himself admitted that he did not receive initiation from Gaurakisor Das babaji in response to a direct question from one of the leaders of the mainstream tradition, Pandit Ramkrishna Dasa Babaji, in 1917 or 1918. There were eye witnesses to that event who were still living in the 1990s. The only dispute is in the minds of those who cut themselves off from the mainstream tradition and refuse to listen to reason. I would say an admission by the principal involved that was witnessed by several others is pretty clear proof. If it were brought up in court, unless there were some jury tampering, the case would certainly go against Bhaktisiddhanta and IGM. This is way beyond being simply a matter of opinion. Now, I am not in agreement with buddhysattva's characterization of IGM being an example of nectar in the hands of demons. He has himself criticized people who demonize their opponents. I think that was in fact part of his characterization of the way cults operate. That is not the way I operate or the way anyone else I know of in authentic CV operates. I think he spoke mistakenly and will probably be the first to admit it. |
|
|
|
Post by While You Wait on Jun 2, 2009 14:00:10 GMT -6
Iinsert elevator music here)
Today's News
Last night a plane went over the ocean
then plunged in the merciless sea
this morning I was treated with no mercy,
by the clerk over at the DMV.
A handsome black woman she was,
but hated my guts for just being there,
and even entitled as I was to my questions,
she refused reply, didn't even look away from the screen.
So silent I fell waiting, for the right file to fill up the gap,
and while waiting I heard her thoughts, she saying,
"hell electing Obama has done shit for me..."
And me, I was thinking,
"those other news, young riponche,
being the new Dalai Lama
has done nothing, no thing for him..."
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jun 2, 2009 14:06:49 GMT -6
That is a thought that has strayed further than most!
|
|
|
|
Post by While You Wait on Jun 2, 2009 14:15:24 GMT -6
And how do we keep our balance?
|
|
