Trying to better grasp Hari's perspective or point of view

[harsi]

Dear Harsi

Please re-read the title of this thread. Also, please re-read the reasons I stated for its existence. The point of this thread is to give me a forum to state what actually happened to me or about me. This thread started when I saw that so many misconceptions about what happened were floating around the ether being stated as facts. My comments were addressed to these "myths."

I understand you want to expand the discussion, but as you saw once before, expanded discussions do not belong in this thread. If there are comments, they should be in the format of, "It is said that you did this or that at that time..." Then I will consider my reply, if any, in the context of clearing up misinformation.

There is so much hurt amongst devotees and former devotees. So many things happened that were clearly harmful to many people. I cannot discuss all of these events, neither can I resolve the traumas that are felt. I do not wish to discuss these kinds of topics in detail as there is no end to them. I have seen that there are as many ideas of what went wrong as there are people who feel hurt; in other words, each person feels his or her hurt in their own unique manner and wishes that hurt to be resolved in an extremely personal manner. The task of healing these wounds is enormous.

I offer my service in the healing of these many wounds through the concepts and experiences I share. I share the means to resolve these issues by understanding their root cause, their reverberating manifestations, and their lack of relation to spiritual issues. I also demonstrate how everything that one wants can be attained in an easier manner when one has cleared out these various misconceptions that are unrelated to the core essence we are as spirit. I think I do this fairly well.

Many of the wounded have decided that I am the root cause of all their problems. I cannot address issues that are not related to me as there is no use in doing so. I do not care to be placed in a position where my thoughts, decisions, or arrangements are judged in this open forum, as I do not wish to waste my energy in a futile attempt to make others feel better about themselves by wrestling their past to the ground. This is something only they can do for themselves. Everything that I share is meant to facilitate that process. As your texts tend to place me in a position where I have to speak in a manner that contradicts what I am or do, I do not wish to address them and at times I feel quite put off by their mood or tone. Perhaps you are not fully aware of the implications of what you write or question?

Your comment about not being able to understand what I am teaching is interesting and is something I am addressing right now within me. I do not want to make a list of my beliefs as what I speak about are not beliefs. I am not saying what I think as much as I am sharing my experiences. As I am sharing my experiences and my consciousness, lists and specified concepts that fit within some system are highly inappropriate as my consciousness does not accommodate these things. I am very different than the systematized philosophical theology to which you are accustomed. Indeed, I am very much free form, just like my music, and it is destructive for me to be placed in a formalized system complete with its inherent demands and expectations.

So if you seek lists and systemization, well, you know where to find them! I give you something quite different.

Harsi wrote:

Now the big question remains what spiritual conclusions and concepts is Hari really teaching? To this day I have my problems in finding that out complitelly. I mean how should I understand anything about Radha Krishna who are standing on the alter by avoiding to speak about any Krishna lila or what is written in some revealed scriptures about this divine personalities?

I am surprised at your ability,Harsi, to listen to Hari during so many years and understand him so less!
At the past summer I had necessity to sistematize for myself what Hari told and I listened again all old lectures and did meditations and what was interestingly- although this lectures looked extemporaneous and were on different topics I found clear picture of step for step exposed knowledge which was also very practical!
I also have not some problems with what Hari doesn't retell Krishna-lilas, I know where to find it if I want to read it. Hari teachs how to perceive directly Their energy and to connect with Them-and it would be strange a little if you would stay in front of somebody and instead of association with him would read a book with describition of his lilas.
I had a talk with people from one gaudia-math and they told me that they meditaate on what how Krcishna massages Radha's feet but if I want to meditate on what how Krishna puts his head on Radha's kneels I should go to another math. I asked them- but can Krishna do that and this and something else what was not described before and can I meditate on all it at once?- and they looked at me as at an injurer.

In the last days I was thinking a lot while at work and also later at home what I should reply to all this, and how should I do it in order to be better understood by you and at the same time not annoy or offend anybody. In the German language there is the word "hineindenken" or "hineinversetzen" which the linguee.de dictionary website translates as "trying to understand, grasp, think its way into, respectively empathize, put oneself in sb.'s position or shoes.

This website shows also words of foreign language like English in their respective text passages so that one can better understand their ussage in the respective foreign language.

For example this "In this way they have thought themselves into the role of the composer and thus experience his work during the concert with a completely new intensity." or the following: "He is able to quickly think his way into the respective industry sector and develops an accurate understanding for clients and their problems." I realized that this two German words and their respective English translation give best a hint at what I am at to understand in regard to Hari.

Hari writes as you can read in the comment above: "I do not want to make a list of my beliefs as what I speak about are not beliefs." Now that is interesting we all know that Hari is speaking sometimes about Radha Krishna or the Divinity. In Saint Petersburg I was participating last year at Janmasthami together with many guests at a fire sacrifice lead by someone he was also participating. We were all throwing grains in the fire yagna while chanting together Sanskrit mantras. Hari writes further: "I am very different than the systematized philosophical theology to which you are accustomed"

Aren't we all somehow accustomed to this kind of "philosophical theology" originating from India and things like deity worship, fire sacrifices, chanting mantras and doing japa sometimes? What distinguishes us really from other people who are doing this also, leaving out here a certain society we are all well accustomed to spaek about, often in a more negative way due to our perhaps bad experiences we may have had in the past within it?

Hari writes: "So if you seek lists and systemization, well, you know where to find them! I give you something quite different." Just to clarify things I do not really "seek lists and systemization" as I seek more to put all this things I saw, and hear from him and those associating with him, in the right perspective in order to understand him and his "followers" better. Maybe thus I gain something and can enhance my own knowledge and "belief" or whatever you would like to call that trust I might have in a divine being which puts all that exists in this world and beyond that in the right order or perspective.

Nanda-grama writes in her comment: "I also have not some problems with what Hari doesn't retell Krishna-lilas, I know where to find it if I want to read it. Hari teaches how to perceive directly Their energy and to connect with Them" to which I would like reply the following: Wherefrom do I really know that it is Radha Krishnas energy I am connecting with? How do I know that Radha Krishna are divine beings or the Divinity or are existing at all if I do not consult also some revealed reference book in this regard? Maybe God and the Divinity have some other alien nature or form? Maybe they are looking like E.T. the extra-terestrial entities and I am getting in touch to their energy, how do I know? Please try to understand me I am just putting myself in the situation of a complitelly ignorant person who tries to understand God or like you say Radha Krishna. What would you answer such a person?

[Nanda-grama]

This topic should be in " fine present days discussions"
At the first, you are not an ignorant person, you have more than 20 years of spiritual practics, you know enough about Radha-Krishna, and it seems to me, you should trust yourself more, then you will understand better what Hari does. What is about new people who did not read about Radha-Krishna's lilas -sometimes it is more easily for them to connect with Deities because they don't know from Prabhupada's books what they are fallen and how many ascesises are necessary for what they could become enough pure and well-deserved in order to associate with Radha-Krishna. Indeed, reading of books gives is only some preparation for what this association would begin, but it can't replace direct experience. For example, me. I read Prabhupada's books very good,I even got by Bhagavad-gita's all shlokas rote , but when in Vrindavan I sow the face of my familiar artist who lived in Vrindavan 5 years when he stayed in front of Deities and associated with Radharani and I tried also- I understood that it was very hardly for me to connect with Her. Only after 98 due to Hari I could do it.

[harsi]

My lack of understanding relating to the explanations and speeches by Hari is stricktly related to the progressive understanding and knowledge about Krishna or Radha Krishna. In my opinion if I have the desire to understand something about my relation to Krishna, (The Supreme according to my "belief" or understanding) or Krishna himself and so on, I would have to find out wherefrom I could get that information or who can tell me something about it. For example we find the information in the Gita where Krishna says: "I am seated in everyone's heart. By all the Vedas, I am to be known."

Now if I am not interested to give that information to others or am interested to teach something else than why do I "worship" Krishna or speak about him at all? Why should I care about him? Do Eckhart Tolle, Yasmuheen, or all the legion of spiritual teachers and advisers from today speak or care about Radha Krishna? I may "feel" something while standing in front of the deity forms of Krishna but would I not have to first know something about the person I may associate with in their dety form at the altar before I may be able to have or develop some feelings in regards to them?

I give you an example. Since ten days my wife Marina is in Italy, on the island of Ischia, where she cures her desease in the spa or therapeutic bath sponsored by the German health insurance. So I am somehow alone at home now. I may have some feelings every now and than of how it is or would feel like to be with her again but this emotions or movements I may have only because I had ones the posibility to meet her and get to know or aquire some knowledge about her as she really is.

Is not the same valid in relation to Krishna or Radharani or any other (divine) person? How should I develop some emotions towards them if I may not first get or am interested to get some informations about them? If I may value that information I may get from various sources is a whole different subject, but first would I not need to get first properly informed. The whole landscape of media exists because people have the intense desire to get some informations on a certain issue wherefrom they can make than their own opinion and decisions. Isnt it so?

[Nanda-grama]

Оk, you want to know more about Radha-Krishna and Their lilas-but there are many books about it,read them! Or you can go on the lecture to Gaudia-math,they constantly speak about lilas. But you want if Hari would retell it- and it is interestingly! He does something what other don't do, and he doesn't do what all do. Do you want if he would act correctly like all ? But why are you sure that all act correctly? Hari offers to do the next step- together with all knowledge which you already have to begin to associate directly with Deities. If to take the example with your wife- when you read books about Radha-Krishna ,it is like if you would read the report of your emissary who spyed on your wife in Italy , but what Hari offers- simply to phone her and to ask her! Of course you should be sure that you speak exactly with your wife but it is the business of technique. Indeed, Hari offers even more cool thing- to perceive your wife who is in Italy now such exactly as if she would be now in the same room with you . And this is mistical experience. Rupa Goswami sow the lilas of Radha-Krishna like if he would be nearly. This is same mistical experience. But you can say- Rupa Goswami was the pure devotee, but we (who is not such pure) can only to read about it!

[harsi]

Оk, you want to know more about Radha-Krishna and Their lilas-but there are many books about it,read them!

Actually I know already quite a lot about stories about the pastimes or lilas of Krishna and Radharani here on Earth. My question is more what should I tell to a complete stranger who does not know anything about Radha Krishna if one would ask me to explain something about those statues or deities who are standing there on the altar, who are they representing? Should I tell them well you should listen for some aswers related to them within yourself. Since I am not interested to tell you here some stories originating from some religions or faiths. I am just interested in the mystical experience of reciprocating my inner feelings and emotions with this persons or deities representing Radha Krishna, the divinity, although I dont know much about their history here on earth, because thats just some religious faith stuff told by those alike Gaudia-math or similar religious faith groups. I am interested in the mystical experience not in some story telling. Now would you say that person would be satisfied with such an answer.

But you want if Hari would retell it- and it is interestingly! He does something what other don't do, and he doesn't do what all do. Do you want if he would act correctly like all ? But why are you sure that all act correctly? Hari offers to do the next step- together with all knowledge which you already have to begin to associate directly with Deities.

Thats of course also an answer regarding what Har's goals are or has in mind by giving his lectures. I was always thinking that the enhancement or expansion of ones spiritual knowledge would be his goal. Now for you as a woman it is quite natural to see the focus or emphasize more on the aspect of exchanging some feelings or emotions with the divine persons represented by some dieties. My point is and was always that the real exchange of some emotions within that relationshp among me and God is taking place within my heart although I my stand in front of some dieties on some altar of some temple. God is also beyond his deity form which may represent him or them (Radha Krishna) on the altar otherwise wouldnt it be just some idolatry?

[aradhya]

Dear Harsi, playng a role of a scepticaly-thoughtful person, your persistance finaly succeded to provoke even me, to take part in this discussion, for this time your chalange is an easy one, namely: Although you claim yet being not much interested in Deity-worship (even after hearing about Radha-Krishna so many times), you still suggest Hari to continue with story-telling (although He sometimes does that) in order to make Deity-performance more atractive to beginners?! What makes you believe that even after your (so called) nonimpressive experiance of this method (you still prefer an inner way of approching The Supreme, not an external one, don't you?) it would be effective to others? Hope you are well!

[Nanda-grama]

Harsi, I am sure that Hari has many other goals about which I even don't surmise , but what is "expansion of ones spiritual knowledge" in your understanding ?

Now for you as a woman it is quite natural to see the focus or emphasize more on the aspect of exchanging some feelings or emotions with the divine persons represented by some dieties

It is not quite so, Harsi. Although I am without doubt a woman exchanging of some feelings is not most strong part of me. As Cyndi would say I have more developed other kinds of "simpathy" (likely, verbal, visual -from her book "bible of intuition") I "hear" an answer when I ask and "see" some things, and also I feel special quality of energy.

My question is more what should I tell to a complete stranger who does not know anything about Radha Krishna if one would ask me to explain something about those statues or deities who are standing there on the altar, who are they representing? Should I tell them well you should listen for some aswers related to them within yourself. Since I am not interested to tell you here some stories originating from some religions or faiths. I am just interested in the mystical experience of reciprocating my inner feelings and emotions with this persons or deities representing Radha Krishna, the divinity, although I dont know much about their history here on earth, because thats just some religious faith stuff told by those alike Gaudia-math or similar religious faith groups. I am interested in the mystical experience not in some story telling. Now would you say that person would be satisfied with such an answer.

Hari does it fine in S-Peterburg and new people perceive Deities very good and " right". Listen to his S-P's lectures!

[harsi]

Hi Aradhya, nice that you have also choosen to take part within our discussion about what the goals and concepts Hari is or might advocate in his lectures or speeches. Slowly we reach the core of the matter. The heart or core of the matter of the teachings of Hari. Is God to be considered in essence to be a person emanating his or her (I dont know what word I should use here to define both aspects of the Divine being) divine energies, or are (to use a gender-neutral word) in fact the divine energiy or multiple energies represented by some deity form of the Divinity like Radha Krishna in essence that what we may call in a more commonly understandable term God?

You imply that what I wrote in regard to the issue we may discuss here that I would claim to be "not much interested in Deity-worship (even after hearing about Radha-Krishna so many times)." Quite the contrary is true as far as I am concerned. I have also myself some murtis or small deties of Radha-Krishna, Lord Jaganath, to which I sometimes offer my food or worship every now and than. So no I am not against worshiping of the Divinity in their deity form. My understanding is rather that through the visible form of the divinity or divinities, represented by this deities, I may express my devotion, gratitude or whatever feelings or emotions I might have or develope towards god or the divine beings. In my opinion god or the divinity is more than just the divine energies I may perceive every now and than. After all even in our daily life we perceive something as coming or emanating from someone because that someone is a person and personality in a form.

Of course we may ask perhaps the question: which came first, the chicken or the egg? The energy or the form? I mean in relation to us and the Supreme or the divinity. I guess thats the crux of the matter relating also to our issue under discussion here. Do we view or should we view the visible form of the divinity in their deity form or forms as "just" a representation of the divine energy, an archetypal image of the male and female divine energies, which is in essence that what we call god. Than all the deities would be secondary or viewed as an emanation of the real One or God as divine energy or are they in fact the representaion of the real form of God which was showen or revialed to us within his pastimes here on earth. Thus describing or speaking about this pastimes of Radha-Krishna would be a just a logical consequence. I mean do I believe or view this pastimes of Radha-Krishna here on earth as a given fact or just some mythology advovated by some religious faith.

I have the impression and that is perhaps just my feeling that Hari is advocating a view on the deites of God or Radha Krishna as a kind of representation of the male and female energies of the divinity which is in itself by nature just spiritual energy, the Supreme. Thus it would be just logical to me to not put the emphasis so much on the pastimes of this divine beings in their forms here on earth. Since that would be somehow anyway just a representation of the play or lila of the divinity which is in essence divine energy which we all are also a part of. So we are also a kind of "divine beiing", in our nature or soul as spiritual energy, although a very little one. To perceive or feel that would thus be the goal of our spiritual quest. Of course what I speculate here could also be all wrong and in essence everything could look completely different.

[harsi]

... what is "expansion of ones spiritual knowledge" in your understanding?

The continuously developing concepts and understanding which people in the past and also at present have all contributed and are contributing to the more complete understanding of the Supreme and us as spirit soul as also to become better aware or feel that or this divine reality we may also be a part of in one way or the other not yet fully known to us.

[aradhya]

It was 1984 when (while living in Zagreb as a student) I bought Bhagavad-Gita and The Second Canto of S.B. from a book-store. A year or so, reading them was all of my experence about Krishna consciousness, before being aquainted with the devotes there. On the front-cover of the Second Canto was picture of Sri Gandarvika only (being on the back-cover of the book, Giridhari was not drawing much attention), so having no idea of Deities I wondered how could any real human look so perfectly, almost as if she was a doll?! Later on, I learned from the devotes that I should admire The Deities in a vice-versa way, wondering how could (seeminly) a statue look as perfect as a real person, and of course they imediately explained to me that there's no much reason wondering about that, after learning that Deity is (not only a real person, but) The Supreme Reality! So, why am I telling this? Because I'm not sure if ,,the proper understanding,, of The Deity made me appreciating She's Beauty more than during my preliminary pre-devotional experiance. The same could be applied to our Hari's teachings. Although I may not be able to find proper explanations about some aspects of His performances (I don't want to discourage anyone trying that, including you, Harsi), I'm not sure it could make His influence on me more beneficial than It's now.

[Hari]

I thank you all for discussing this issue frankly. I find this discussion valuable. I have replied to it in my Discussions With Hari forum as the discussion no longer is of the good old days, but like Nanda said, it's about the fine present days.