Krishna Prem

[Deleted]

Here is front picture of D L Roy's music CD with D L Roy's picture.

Attachments:

[Deleted]

Back CD of Music CD with songs information.

Jay Nitai

Attachments:

[gerard]

The review of Sri Krishna Prem in The Aryan Path of October 1934 of


The Origin and Development of Religion in Vedic Literature. By P. S. DESHMUKH, M.A., D.Phil., with Foreword by A. Berriedale Keith. ( Oxford University Press. 22s. 6d.)

This book is an excellent example of the type of scholarship that dominates our centres of academic learning. Accurate, careful, well documented, exhibiting first-hand acquaintanceship, not only with the original texts, but with all the mass of "recognised" scholarship in the principal European languages, the book plays the scholarly game according to all the rules laid down by the best "authorities". To those who like that sort of thing it may be confidently recommended. The Vedic Gods are lucidly classified and “explained”, the Vedic religion is linked up with the earlier Indo-Iranian religion, and that with the still earlier : (somewhat conjectural) Indo-European religion.

Perhaps the most original contribution is the author's contention that the Indo-European religion was, "religious" from the very beginning and was not, as has often been maintained, a development out of more primitive "magical" beliefs, arising out of the breakdown of the latter in experience. The author brings a good deal of evidence to support his contention, and holds that the Vedic religion was from the outset a "poetic" worship of deified natural forces vaguely anthropomorphised and almost entirely, beneficent. All this is very capably done, though it is perhaps a little irritating to be told that "Keith has established" or "Macdonnell has demonstrated" this or that point, without being given any chance to check the "demonstration". They may be the author's gurus but they aren't necessarily everybody's.

Apart, however, from the scholarly game with its fixed but unproved axioms such as that all religion originated out of primitive notions, whether "poetic" or otherwise, that all philosophical conceptions are certainly "late", that magic and religion had no other basis than childishly faulty reasoning, and its apparent belief that in the ancient world men went about like the character in Dickens saying "here's a hill, let's worship it!"—apart from all this, the book has little interest.

Anyone who had hoped that an Indian scholar, at least, would be able to give us some real insight into the Vedic literature will be sadly disappointed, though he will find some interesting facts here and there if he is prepared to supply the necessary insight himself. The author's utter lack of perception of the real inner meanings of the Vedic hymns is clearly "established" (as he might say) by his confessed failure to understand why the Gayatri mantra should have been selected for such especial veneration and be considered to contain the essence of all the Vedas. Ability to account for the unique importance of Gayatri may be regarded as a critical test of an expositor's power to penetrate beyond the letter of the Vedic texts and to reveal something of their inner meaning. From this point of view this book fails lamentably.

One other instance will suffice. We read a great deal about the worship of sky-gods such as Dyaus, and are invited to admire the picture of early Aryans contemplating the beneficent light of the sky in rapt (if slightly stupid) adoration. It doesn't appear even to occur to the author that the reason the Aryan Rishis worshipped the "sky-god" was not because they were wonder-struck by the beneficent daylight but because the expanse of luminous blue was to them a symbol of an even more beneficent Light, a Light "which never was on sea or land," a Light which the few, the Rishis, have seen in all ages but to represent which to the unseeing many they have always been forced to employ more or less material symbols.

No doubt it is true that Keith has not demonstrated nor Macdonell established this Light, nor has it been explained Brahmasutrapadaischaiva hetumadbhir vinischitaih, "in decisive Brahmasutra words, full of reasonings," by Griswold, Oldenberg or Kaegi; nevertheless, as Galileo might have said, "It shines, for all that" ! Perhaps too, Sri Krishna (or the author of the Gita if preferred) knew more about the real meaning of the Veda than our modern teachers and was not merely trying to support a new creed by appealing to ancient authority when he said: "Vedaischa sarvair aham eva vedya"— "I am that which is to be known in all the Vedas."

Readers must judge for themselves. It is useless to criticise the learned author of the book for not building a temple when all he intended to give us was a museum. It is quite a good museum. I have tried to indicate to which class of visitors it will be interesting and to which class it will not.
SRI KRISHNA PREM

[The reviewer is an Englishman and a Cambridge graduate who has retired to a life of study and meditation in the Himalayas.-EDS. ]

[Nitaidas]

Thanks, Subrataji, for that information on Dilip Roy and Sri Krishnaprem. It is very much appreciated. And thanks to you, too, gerardji, for more of his reviews I've not had a chance to visit University of Missouri at Columbia yet to see what else might be there in that journal. May not get to it until next month. Moving into a busy time here. I may have to return this copy of Yogi Sri Krishnaprem soon. too. So here is another piece of that letter:



I think that it is most important that we should always remember the distinction between our outer personalities and our inner selves, as Sri Aurobindo so beautifully expounds in his letter, those selves which Krishna describes as "Eternal portions of Himself" and which Vaisnava doctrine refers to as Krishna's Nitya Das. By that inner self one must dominate the outer one or, if one is not always strong enough to do that, one must at least detach oneself from the outer, float on the outer self as the lotus floats on the water, surrounded by it but quite untouched. Faith in Krishna and love for Him is really the property of this inner self. The ordinary mental or emotional attitudes that we ordinarily call belief (or doubt) are merely shadows of this inner faith cast on the outer mind and emotions. That is why they are fleeting while the inner faith is unwavering. When one acts from that inner self one is utterly free whatever one may be doing but when one acts from the outer so-called self one is bound even when one thinks one is freely indulging one's own desires. In reality one is simply mechanically following the play of the three gunas in one's (lower) nature. Nevertheless I am not urging that what is called "self-realization" is the goal. It can be had quite certainly and is equally certainly a state of ananda but it is not the full ananda. For that, the self which is anandakan must enter into relation with Krishna who is anandaghan [dense mass of bliss]. That is why the last word of the Gita is not atmajnan (self-knowledge) but Manmana bhava madbhakto (Be thou my devotee) and that is why the Bhagavat describes faith in Atmajnan as sattvic but faith in Krishnaseva as nistraigunya.

I think I can sum up my 'creed' (would it were my practice! but action always lags behind vision) in four words: "Ask nothing; give everything." At one time I passionately desired 'experiences' and if one really desires them Krishna is no niggard, but now I feel that love of Him must be independent of all 'experiences' which will come and go at His will and to serve His purpose. It must be something like the air we breathe which may, no doubt, sometimes be perfumed with scent of flowers but is no less essential to us when it has no perceptible scent.



[more later]

[gerard]

This thread got me re-reading Dilip Kumar Roy’s “Sri Aurobindo Came To Me” 1951, second edition All India Books, Pondicherry 1984. Chapter XII is ‘Sri Aurobindo vis-à-vis Sri Krishnaprem’. Roy describes briefly his first encounter with Nixon as he was still known at the time. Roy met Nixon in 1923.

This chapter is 70 pages so I will make some excerpts of the letters from Krishna Prem to Dilip Roy. (Letters which Roy showed Aurobindo and Aurobindo then reacted to Krishna Prem’s letters.) I hope it is not too long.

Roy mentions that he has included a 50-page article on Krishna Prem in his Bengali book Bhramyaman (A Wanderer Again).




From a letter of Krishna Prem to Roy in ca 1934, p.348-352, with one of the very few times Krishna Prem mentions Sri Caitanya:


"You speak of the 'silence' of the Buddha which you contrast with 'expression'. But if Buddha had not 'expressed’, then we should not have five hundred million (or whatever it is) Buddhists living today. In truth he expressed a great deal and it was only on certain ultimate problems that he remained silent because they cannot be expressed in words—not at least in logical words. Symbolism is another matter. You say: 'Suppose Buddha were a formless being under a formless tree in a formless Gaya; would we feel the same thrill at his silence?'

"Well, in reality, that is just what He is in one aspect. This is the meaning of the doctrine of the Dharmakaya and of the 'docetism' that marked so many Mahayana and also Christian Gnostic schools. But for most this Formless remains a mere matter of words and is, consequently, a falsity.

Only experience can give us the truth. Without experience, the 'formless' is an empty abstraction, cold like all such, and shot through with the falsity and unreality that pervades all our purely intellectual concepts. We must use them but they only gain significance when life flows into them. In reality, they are neither cold nor abstract. It is our process of acquiring and using them that makes them so. We abstract by a process of negation and then wonder that the result is cold and negative. Our whole process stays on the purely intellectual level.

When we say that Krishna is nirakara we have only said what He is not. But our positive statements are equally delusive. When we say that He is anandamaya we equally miss the reality because most men do not know what ananda is. They only know pleasure. They try to understand ananda in terms of pleasure and hence you get the materialising of the spiritual that marks so much of ordinary Vaishnava thought just as from the misuse of negation you get the coldness of so much Vedantic thought.

The root of the trouble is just the mistaking of intellectual concepts for reality. When a man has seen something even of the Reality—call him Krishna or Buddha or Brahman—he then knows what is meant. He knows how He is nirakara but not cold and how He is anandamaya but not mere pleasure. Till we get experience and knowledge we shall always be in unreality however lofty our conceptions may be. The Vedantin despises the Vaishnava for the latter's concreteness and the Vaishnava spits at the Vedantin saying it is all cold.

One says 'I don't want' and the other says 'I want'. Damn all their 'wants' and 'don't wants'; they are quite irrelevant. These 'wants' and 'don't wants' do all the damage. It is not what we want that matters but what He wills, which is quite a different thing. All these concepts are so many suits of clothes. Unless we reach up to the Reality and fill them, they only serve for endless debate.

What did the Rishi mean by saying He is nirakara? What did Buddha mean by anatman? What did the Vaishnavas mean by saying He is nikhilarasamrita murti? [note Roy: Literally, a form made up of the nectarous essence of universal delight.]

The answer to this question must be sought in experience, not in mere dialectic. When the light of experience streams in and fills the empty concepts, then and then only does recognition flow in like a sea and we can know why the above words are used. Ascharyavat pashyati kashchidenam (as wonderful, some, few, see Him). Then we can know why the atma of the Upanishad means the same thing as the anatma of the Buddha and in a flash be free from the empty scholastic disputes that have filled the millennia. 'Oh but these are contradictions'—peevishly explains the intellect to which the only answer is: 'Very likely they are, but you have dam' well got to put up with them!'

"I don't mean at all to urge the contempt for the intellect which most Christians and some Vaishnavas have taught, but I do mean to say that the intellect is in itself a sort of formative or shaping machine. It can only work if it is supplied with material to shape and that material must come either from the sense-world below or from the spiritual world above.

"In the meanwhile it seems to me as foolish to lose one's emotion in the coldness of abstract negation as to fuddle one's mind in the warmth of a (fundamentally) sensuous Goloka.

"These thoughts were suggested to me by the contrast you drew between the emotional singing of Chaitanya Deva and the silent meditation of the Buddha. Needless to say that the remarks in the paragraphs immediately above this do not apply to these great Teachers but only to some of their followers.

"You speak of a certain shakiness at the idea of being immersed in a Timeless mute Akshara Brahman; but surely that is only because of our ignorance of what is meant by that experience and of a consequent misconception in terms of worldly experiences. That is where so many Vaishnavas as well as Vedantins go wrong. They quarrel furiously about words, about the expression, instead of bending their whole energy on an attempt to realise what is meant by the expression. In the words of an old Buddhist writer, 'that is called confusing the moon with the finger that points to it.'

"Books are after all just words, but these words fall into two categories. Words used to express worldly experience and words used to express transcendental experience. (Perhaps there is also an intermediate class which are just words!) When there is any reason to suppose that words are being used to express transcendental experience, it becomes of the utmost importance how we try to read them. The wrong way is to fasten on the words themselves and find fault with them because they are not the same words as we find in some other book. The right way is to try with all one's might to find out what the words mean: to find out why those particular words were chosen by the writer to express his vision and just in proportion as we succeed in this attempt, we shall gain a new insight into Him 'from whom words together with the mind fall back baffled.'

"So you see that in my previous letter I was not deprecating expression but only lamenting the inadequacy of it. In the last resort, this whole cosmos is but expression— Divine Expression, and in proportion as He, the kavih puranah, is able to manifest in us, we shall ourselves automatically become centres of expression. Till then, our productions whether in the realm of poetry, philosophy or art, are but the play of children, funerals where none is dead and marriage where there is no bride."

[Deleted]

Jay Nitai,

This short biography may shed some light of spiritual transformation of Sri Dilip Kumar roy and serve us an source of inspiration.

DILIP KUMAR ROY
Some Biographical Notes

22nd, January 1897 Born at 203/1/1 Cornwallis Street Calcutta, in a cultured Bengali family at his maternal uncle's house.


Father Dwijendralal Roy (19.07.1863 - 17.05. 1913). A Dramatist, composer, singer and nationalist with a degree in agriculture from England. Although his mother was a direct descendent of Advaita Goswami of Shantipur, a staunch disciple of Sri Chaitanya (Fifteenth- Sixteenth Centuries A.D.), D.L. Roy himself was a rationalist. During his tenure as Deputy Magistrate he dared to tell the Lt. Governor of Bengal that he was not an expert in the laws of land survey. The result? He was never granted promotion from his post in spite of his proficiency. That he was not altogether dismissed from service was because of his superior who gave a report that "Mr. Roy is a monument of industry and ability." While another Englishman told the Lt. Governor, "I think Mr. Roy is right." Courage and honesty were ingrained in him. His watchword was truth.


Mother Surabal Devi, daughter of P.C. Majumdar. She was beautiful like a daughter of heaven, as her name implies. D.L. Roy loved her so much that he never looked at another woman when his wife died at the age of twenty-seven on 29th November 1903. He brought up his children, fulfilling the roles of both mother and father.


Paternal Grandfather Kartikeya Chandra Roy (1820-85). Diwan of Krishnanagar. A man of character and extremely honest. He was also a great musician and composer.


1908 Sri D.L. Roy built Suradham. Sri Dilip Kumar's spiritual quest started in this house.


1908 - 1909 -Sri Nirmalendu Lahiri, his cousin and devout follower of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa took him to Sri 'M'- Sri Mahendranath Gupta, who kept a day to day record of Sri Ramakrishna's sayings, later published as Ramakrishna Kathamrita in Bengali (translated into English as The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, 1922). Dilip Kumar Roy was deeply fascinated by Sri Ramakrishna's personality and installed him in his heart as his Guru and loved him deeply. Sri Dilip Kumar wrote "Faith suddenly descended into me-The Mother's grace through the soul stirring message of Her beloved son, the great Messiah Sri Ramakrishna".


17th May, 1913 Sudden demise of his father due to apoplexy.


1913 Passed matriculation examination with scholarship. Joined Presidency College. Took up Science. Met Subhash Chandra Bose. A lasting and intimate friendship developed.


1918 Passed BSc. with First Class Honors in Mathematics.


1919 Left for England to pursue further studies at Cambridge.Subhash Chandra Bose (Netaji) joined him subsequently.


July 1920 Met Romain Rolland in Switzerland and sang before him, which was met with immense praise.


1920-1921 Passed Part I Mathematical Tripos and Part I Music Special in Cambridge.


1921 Extremely impressionable, he took up one line after another; studied LLB to become a barrister, deposited fees for CA. Meanwhile, Rabindranath Tagore urged him to take up music as a career. Subhash and Rolland urged him too. Dilip himself wrote, "Rolland finally persuaded me to direct all my energies to the cultivation of a musical career". Dilip learnt French, German, Italian and a little Russian.


1922 Went to Germany to study western music. Presented a lecture at the International Conference at Lugano, Switzerland. This was attended by world renowned celebrities like Bertrand Russell, Romain Rolland, Herman Hesse, George Duhamel and others.

Met President Maserick of Czechoslovakia.

Toured Vienna, Prague, Budapest and other cities to speak on Indian music and culture, including Sanskrit.


November 1922 Returned to India and consequently went on a tour studying Indian music from classical masters like Abdul Karim, Faiz Khan, Chandan Chaube, Pt. Bhatkande, Gaurishankar Mishra, Surendranath Majumdar, Hafiz Ali Khan and others.

Wrote a book in Bengali on Indian music "Bhramyamaner Dina Panjika (Diary of a musical Rover)", which won him instant fame in Bengal.


1922-1923 Became very popular as a musician and a composer. Started giving charity concert with his students at Ram Mohan library hall in Calcutta.


1923 Met Ronald Nixon, professor at Lucknow University (who later came to be known as Yogi Sri Krishna Prem, who's Guru was Yashoda Ma). Incidentally it was Sri Krishna Prem who introduced Sri Dilip Kumar Roy to Sri Aurobindo's mystic ideology and asked him to read Essays on the Gita. He said every Indian who loves the Gita should read it, for Sri Aurobindo's commentary breaks new ground and is more inspiring than any other, thanks to his resplendent yogic intuition.


24th Jan, 1924 Met Sri Aurobindo at Pondicherry, two days after his 27th birthday.


1925 Got an offer from Pt. Madan Mohan Malaviya to hold the chair of music in the Banares Hindu University, and an invitation to become the director of All India Radio. Sri Dilip Kumar Roy declined both the offers.


1927 Invited by Edison Company, USA for making the first Long-Playing Disc.

Subhash Chandra Bose arranged a grand felicitation programme at Ram Mohan Library, where Rabindranath Tagore and Saratchandra Chaterjee came to bless him.

Toured Europe giving lectures on music. At Nice, he met two unforgettable personalities, Madam Calve the famous prima donna- a great devotee of Swami Vivekananda, and the great Paul Richard who told Sri Dilip Kumar Roy about Sri Aurobindo "I have not met his peer in the whole world. To me he is the Lord Shiva Incarnate." This was the final impetus towards Sri Aurobindo. A profound feeling of vairagya gripped him and he returned to India canceling his onward journey to USA.


22nd Nov 1928 Overcoming all his vacillation, he surrendered to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. He wrote to Sri Aurobindo- "I surrender unconditionally to you, all I have and am. You must accept me."


1937 A brief visit to Calcutta after nine years. Met Km. Uma Bose who was a musical prodigy and whom Mahatma Gandhi called 'The Nightingale of Bengal', and the most glorious chapter of his musical creativity began.


1938 Upon invitation by Calcutta University and the Director of Public Instruction, wrote a book Geetashree for the university's music syllabus with notations and technical details of Hindustani Music. Sri Dilip Kumar also wrote Sangitikee, a historical account of classical and folk music of Northern India. Both books were prescribed by the University.


22nd Jan 1942 Km. Uma Bose passed away leaving a great vacuum in Bengali music.


7th Oct 1946 Met an extraordinary lady Smt. Janak Kumari (Later known as Ma Indira Devi) at Jabbalpur.

Also met M.S. Subalakshmi and taught her Meera bhajans. Later on in 1971, M.S. came to Hari Krishna Mandir to learn songs (mainly Ma Indira Devi's Meera Bhajans and Sri Dilip Kumar Roy's Bengali songs)


22nd Jan 1947 Bengal celebrated Sri Dilip Kumar's Fiftieth Birthday. Bengal acknowledged the versatility of his genius- the poet, thinker, novelist, musician and the mystic, all in one. Presented him a purse for the Pondicherry Ashram and a set of annotated Srimad Bhagvatam.

Sri Dilip Kumar later wrote two masterpieces, Bhagvati Katha and Immortals of the Bhagavat.


21st Feb 1949 On the Mother's birthday, Ma Indira Devi came to Pondicherry for darshan. After darshan she went into Bhav Samadhi in Sri Dilip Kumar's presence, while he was singing. Sri Aurobindo endorsed it as genuine and wrote that the Samadhi was of Savikalpa type and she was ready for yoga.

Ultimately, with the blessings of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, Sri Dilip Kumar Roy gave Ma Indira Devi initiation. She stared hearing songs sung by Saint Mirabai in trance, and the songs were documented. This phenomenon was authenticated by Sri Aurobindo and continued till Ma Indira Devi left this world.


5th Dec 1950 The sudden demise of Sri Aurobindo shattered the world of Sri Dilip Kumar.


1st Oct 1951 Sri Dilip Kumar heard the voice of Saint Mirabai of hallowed memory for the first time himself. He maintained a diary chronicling his conversations with her, a part of which, the advent of Mira, has been published in Indiranjali Vol.1. During this time he took a vow of Akash Vritti, depending completely on the Divine for sustenance.


Jan 1953 Sri Dilip Kumar Roy, accompanied by Ma Indira Devi, went on a world tour as cultural and spiritual ambassadors of India, sponsored by the Government of India and met a whole host of global celebrities. The complete account of this tour was written in "Deshe Deshe Chali Udey", a travelogue in Bengali.


1954 Declined an offer by Sri C.P. Ramaswami Iyer for the post of Arts Director at Annamalai University, which would have helped Sri Dilip Kumar to tide over his poor financial position. Instead he went to stay in Pune in a dilapidated bungalow 'Dunlavin Cottage' of Sri Chunilal Mehta.


1957 Papa Ramdas and Mother Krishna Bai visited Sri Dilip Kumar's Ashram and found both Sri Dilip Kumar Roy and Ma Indira Devi completely absorbed in intense Sadhana and blessed them.


--------------------------------------------------
Sri Aurobindo wrote in Savitri-
A prayer, a master act, a king idea
Can link a man's strength to a transcendent force,
Then miracle is made the common rule.

Every word of his came true in this Ashram.

8th Jan 1959 Sri Dilip Kumar Roy shifted his Ashram to the present premises in Pune.


1961 He delivered his famous lecture Parama Sanskriti in Bengali and sang at Tagore's centenary celebrations at Marquis Square in Calcutta.


1951-1979 The most productive and fruitful period of Sri Dilip Kumar Roy's life. The versatility of his genius flowered during this period and ultimately he attained what he was seeking all his life- 'Siddhi of his entire Sadhana'. Every facet of his life was colored by spiritual sensibility and ecstasy.

Sri Dilip Kumar was honoured with the titles-
a) Sur-Sudhakar from Sanskrit College, Calcutta
b) Fellow of Sangeet Natak Academy
c) D.Litt from Calcutta and Rabindra Bharti Universities

He was made the President of Akhil Banga Sanskriti Samelan at Chandigarh.

Many saints and celebrities visited his Ashram including Sri Anandamayee Ma, Srimat Anirvan, Swami Brahmananda of Uttar Kashi, Mahamahopadhyay Dr. Gopinath Kaviraj, Late President Dr. S Radhakrishnan and many others.


17th Dec 1975 Sri Dilip Kumar started hearing the Lord's flute- a rare spiritual attainment. This continued till he breathed his last on 6th January, 1980.


1976 Calcutta celebrated the eightieth birthdays of Sri Dilip Kumar Roy (22nd Jan) and of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose (23rd Jan). Sri Dilip Kumar himself inaugurated the birthday celebrations of Netaji. He was felicitated with a book-Varan Malika.


1977 Sri Dilip Kumar delivered three memorial lectures on Sri Aurobindo at Pune University.


1st Oct 1979 He had a vision of Ma Radharani.


11th Nov 1979 Sri Dilip Kumar fell ill.


23rd Nov 1979 He wrote his last poem-"Antim Prarthana"- Last Prayer with his own hands. One day he wrote in his diary 'Namah Sri Aurobindaya- Sarva Devamayo Guru'.


6th Jan 1980 Sri Dilip Kumar Roy told Ma Indira Devi: "Wash my hands. I have to touch the Lord's feet".

The great minstrel saint reached the lotus feet of the Lord at 3:40 pm.

Jay Nitai

[Deleted]

Jay Nitai,

Notice the effect of the word by Sri Krishna Prem Ji ("remember that Krishna's feet are more real than yours") on the life of Sri D L Roy that at the end Sri Dilip Kumar Roy told Ma Indira Devi: "Wash my hands. I have to touch the Lord's feet".

Jay Nitai

[gerard]

Thanks Subrataji for that time-line of Sri Dilip Kumar Roy's life.


Some other fragments from letters of Sri Krishna Prem to Roy as published in “Sri Aurobindo Came To Me”.


p. 346-7

The more one goes on in this path, the more one feels the limitations not only of speech but of thought. The mind is too heavy, too coarse. It will not respond, or responds but imperfectly, to the subtle vibrations that as it were come to it from above. The highest truth must needs be presented in symbols. Fichte, the German philosopher, said that if he had to live his life over again the first thing he would do would be to invent a new set of symbols, but alas, it is not so easy.

Symbols are born, not made. They descend from above and cannot be artificially manufactured. In this matter you, poets, have an advantage over philosophers like myself who try to use what is so ludicrously miscalled 'exact thought'. From below one can compile only allegories: real symbols are given from above. But when given one can learn far more from them than from words.

The symbol (or image if you like) of the seated Buddha, for instance, taught me far more than I was able to learn from my assiduous study of the Buddhist texts. In fact, the mental concepts—miscalled knowledge—derived from the latter did much to obscure the real knowledge derived from the former and it was only as I learnt to pass behind the words and 'thoughts' that the true knowledge originally given by the 'symbol' was able to shine forth once more and to some extent irradiate even the dead conceptual knowledge.


p.357

You talk of humility, but I don't know whether humility is the truest test of spirituality or not. All spiritual men I know are profoundly humble because they know their true position. But humility does not consist in the damnable deprecatory rubbing of the hands that is so fashionable among some Vaishnavas. That is only an inverted conceit. True humility is an absence of egoism. It comes from realising that one is an entirely insignificant phenomenon in the cosmos; even if his capacities and messages shake the stars in their courses he is a transient phenomenon. He had a beginning and he will have an end.


p. 358-9

As an instance in illustration of my previous remarks I may say that I am distinctly occupied (though not sorely troubled as the phrase goes) with doubts whether there is a personal God. (So you see your sceptical friends needn't be so proud of their doubts). Don't get alarmed either. The doubts refer to the meaning and adequacy of the terms employed and have reference to such questions as whether it is permissible, to put new wine in old bottles, to call old things by new names, to disregard associations etc. If I say, I believe in a personal God, a lot of fools will suppose I mean someone like the Lord God Jehovah on His throne, and if I say I don't believe, others will suppose that I believe in abstraction—a sort of 'Space, Time and Deity' kind of thing. This is merely by way of illustration of the function of doubt. I keep a whole collection of doubts; grow them in fact like mustard and cress and when they are ripe I eat them up...

[Sakhicharan Das]

Jai Nitai!

I am a little surprised that with all the Krishnaprem quotes that have been posted, his very best quote has been overlooked.

From a letter Sri Krishnaprem wrote to Dilip Kumar Raya dated September 29, 1945

“My Dear Dilip,

I will tell you what is written in burning letters of fire in my heart that carry their own guarantee of truth:

Krishna and the Guru are one, but if I leave Him, Krishna may leave me–at least He may smile His inscrutable (the samo ‘haM sarva-bhUteSu) smile and say, “Well if you don’t care for Me then I don’t care for you either–at least not more than I care for the louse on a monkey’s backside.” But my Guru will never leave me whatever I do. I might leave him, but he would never leave me. I may fall from the Path, and return to the flesh-pots and wallow in their filthy slops for five lives or fifty lives. I may blaspheme the Sacred Stone within my heart and die cursing God and man–all this and more I may do, but he will never leave my side. Each separate folly of mine will be a stab of sorrow in the heart of he who is sorrowless, but he will never turn away his face nor cease from trying to assuage the pains that I suffer from my own foolish acts. Never, never will he leave my side nor cease to guide my steps until I stand in that eternal Braja where he stands now. God-forsaken and man-forsaken I may be, but Guru-forsaken, never.”

[Nitaidas]

Thanks Sakhicaranji. Is that from the book Yogi Sri Krishnaprem? I had to return my copy borrowed from Interlibrary Loan. Please keep them coming if you have a copy of the book or some other source.

[Sakhicharan Das]

Nov 19, 2010 15:22:48 GMT -6 Nitaidas said:

Thanks Sakhicaranji. Is that from the book Yogi Sri Krishnaprem? I had to return my copy borrowed from Interlibrary Loan. Please keep them coming if you have a copy of the book or some other source.

Yes it is Nitaidas Ji. My copy of Yogi Sri Krishnaprem is in Radhakund and my body is in Bangkok. I may have a couple more quotes on my hard drive. I will have to search around a bit.

[Deleted]

I have a copy of YSK here. Will try to grab some quotes to share after Purnima.
Either Sakhiji or I will pick up a copy for you, Nitaidas Ji.

ys,
v

[gerard]

Some more fragments from letters of Sri Krishna Prem to Roy as published in “Sri Aurobindo Came To Me”.

page 363-6

"Now what is this 'faith and experience’ business? I can't remember any remarks on that subject to M. [I think with M. the compiler of The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna, Mahendranath Gupta, is meant –G.] In fact the only thing I ever remember saying on the subject of faith was contained in a letter to you in which, as far as I remember, I said that faith was the light of the higher Self penetrating the lower or some words to that effect.

"Casting about in my memory I do seem to recollect some vague talk with M. but the remarks were no doubt ad hoc and probably were directed against the orthodox religious demand for a blind acceptance of dogmatic belief. Such belief or pseudo-belief (for it seldom, if ever, is real belief) has nothing to do with what I meant by faith in writing to you. This is not an intellectual assent to intellectualised propositions for which one has insufficient evidence, but an attitude of the soul which is based on a dim perception in the personality of something more clearly known on higher levels. That, at any rate, is what I meant by 'true faith' and I should have thought that your Gurudev [Aurobindo] would more or less agree with it. But at any rate that is my position at present; I fancy that either you or M. must have garbled what I said.

"Certainly experiences are not the Goal but experience (in a way, at least) is, for by experience I mean living knowledge manifesting in one's being, and if that is not present, something is wrong or at least something has not started yet.
"Of course faith precedes experience on this level but it does so only because it is itself the Light from experience already present higher up.
"Do you know what is immortal or what is mortal? and do you know which of these you are?
"Answer these questions and you will understand what I mean by faith. Incidentally, you will also know what I mean by bhakti, the ahuti—offering—of the mortal in the flame of the immortal. I say again:

‘I said it loud—I said it clear:
I went and shouted in his ear.'

"I am not in any way against emotion. That would be quite absurd. But I do criticise the current practice of weltering in emotion for its own sake and for the sake of the pleasure attaching to it. That is like a man weltering in a hot bath.

"Know Krishna, love Krishna and work for Krishna. Then you can leave all the blisses to take care of themselves. You will certainly not find any shortage of them. Of course there is bliss experienced in self-offering but do not offer yourself in order to get the bliss but offer yourself because He is Krishna and your being can only fulfil itself by being united to His Being.

"About bhakti—the word is ambiguously used. Some people mean by it an emotional rapture as such. (Don't ignore these two small words). In that case bhakti is not the highest thing. Others, including myself, mean by it self-giving to Krishna which is of course accompanied by emotional rapture but it is not performed for the sake of the rapture. In that case it is the highest or something like it at least, for I do not like to dogmatise about high, higher, highest. Loud applause from you at this point I suppose? But be sure you don't misunderstand me. Before you can offer the oblation into the fire you have to know where the fire is and Krishna is in the light, in the light, in the light!

"Of course I have left out all sorts of qualifications. There is such a thing as preliminary offering, or say, wish to offer, and much more, but I am writing a letter, not a book.

"Disregard the Light at your peril for He is in the Light and a light must mingle with Light. Fail to know the Light and you will helplessly tread the dark path of the dakshinayana, whirling helplessly, the sport but not the master of Karma.
"Everybody should strive to find out so that at death he may echo the cry of the Orphic initiate: 'From the Pure I go to the Pure'. All I can say is that the Light in which Krishna dwells is a light which sees, not a light which is seen and the voice of Krishna is a voice which speaks, not a voice which is heard.

"The point about concrete representation, images, myths, etc. is simply that symbols which are known as symbols are sometimes less dangerous than symbols which are not recognised as such and it is impossible, however 'abstract' and Vedanti one may be to escape from symbols as all words are symbols."



----

Could Sri Krishna Prem mean with "Krisna in the Light" and "a Light that sees" that Sri Krishna is the Person within the brahmajyoti as Light coming from Him as a glow, prabhA?

[Sakhicharan Das]

I found that I had chapter 6 of Yoga of the Bhagavad Gita on my laptop. It's in the .docx format. If anyone has a problem with that I will upload it in the format of your choice.

www.box.net/shared/j1b686tul2

[gerard]

Some other fragments from letters of Sri Krishna Prem to Roy as published in “Sri Aurobindo Came To Me”.



page 371

About 'faith and optimism'—well, you know who it is that rushes in where angels fear to tread. But still one fool may, I suppose, open his heart to another. Why do you worry over what you can't accept in your friend Staunch's robust faith? As I see it, it is not his faith which is the difficulty but the particular mental concepts in which he expressed it. True faith is naked. It is not belief in this or that: it has little, if anything, to do with 'this or that'. It is a naked smokeless flame that burns in the secret recesses of the heart, weaving the soul and lightening it on its path. The true content of the Flame we cannot formulate in the mind and so we cover it with a painted lampshade and say we believe in this or that, the figures which our minds have painted on the shade. And that does not matter provided we really don't believe that the painted figures are the content of our Faith. They are symbols of it, for even the mind cannot draw a single line arbitrarily but they share in the mind's error and inadequacy.
It is this that causes the rationalist to curse so. He is always active demolishing the painted figures of men's faith and then is astonished to find the faith still there clothed in new figures: 'Nainam chhindanti shastrani.'


page 372

We should not be worried by the optimist pessimist-business. Optimism is the disposition to think that our wishes will be realised and pessimism the disposition to think that most probably they will not. Neither of them is at all relevant. Not our wishes but Krishna's will is what matters—and that will be realised, make no mistake about that. How and when is known to Him—not to us.
This famous civilisation of ours and all its treasures of art and literature and science may vanish as did that of Atlantis and yet nothing will have gone, for He is there and all is in Him.