Harimedia Forum

I read in this forum a conversation of Prabhupada with his disciples where he speaked:"if anyone wants to contact directly Krishna, that is not possible... Because unless we are completely purified, Krishna will does not talk directly. Therefore you have to understand Krishna through the spiritual master. If one has become pure, without any material desire, then that is possible. But if there is some material desire, we cannot expect direct communication."
I want to understand why he saied it. Someone can say me:because Prabhupada was a traditionalist and learned from the past. Then I have the question why does this tradition tell it? Because it is obvious untruth. Because it means that nobody can connect directly with Krishna. Because always all people have some desires. A desire is a sign of life. Somebody can say that Prabhupada beared in mind "material desires". But what is it? One energy, the energy of my soul goes through my chakras and when it comes out through my 7 chakra I feel the desire to be together with God, but when the same my energy comes out through 2 chakra I feel a sexual desire, and when through 1- the desire to defend myself and to be successful in my business, when through 4- the desire to love. This is same energy. Not people invented this energetic sistem, God created it. If I will suppress the flowing of my energy in some chakras I will be ill or I will be unhappy. I can also ignore my desires- then I will be in special condition when I will not feel myself, my life will be almost automatic, I will need some instructions about what I should do now because I will not be sure in myself. I think it happens in ISSCON. Man comes to his guru and asks: should I marry or not? I don't think that same problem is in India, whence this "tradition" came. It is the problem in ISSCON. And therefore I think why Prabhupada saied so. Everybody has a device in his head like an antenna for the connection with God. Certainly if a person is in tamaguna, it will be not easyly for him to connect with God, but most likely this idea even will not come to his head.
Would somebody have some idea about it? Why should be some man ( who doesn't interest me very much or even doesn't remember about my existence ) between God and me? I understand that a teacher helps very much to connect with God, but Prabhupada saied not about it. ( I know most strong argument of probable answer: You are foolish mataji, you are insignificant and falled, how can you understand it? How can you criticize and doubt in the greatest from great people? Generally, why do you think? Simply chant Hare Krishna! If I would have a small feeling of fault it would be irresistible argument for me )

How about such an answer?: "All the planets within material existence have the material miseries of repeated birth, death, old age and disease. The spiritual world has no such inebrieties. Following in the footsteps of Arjuna, if we act according to Krishna's instructions, we can attain the abode of Krishna from where we never have to return to this material world.

Our thinking, which is now absorbed in material energy, must be transferred to the spiritual energy. This is made possible by practicing to remember Sri Krishna by always chanting His names (which are spiritual, non-different from the Lord) and molding our life's activities in such a way that we can remember Him always.

It is Krishna's instructions that this process must be learnt by rendering service to and enquiring submissively from a self realized soul, in an unbroken disciplic succession from Krishna.

Vedic knowledge is infallible, above all doubts and mistakes. The purpose of Vedic knowledge is to know the Supreme Lord Sri Krishna. Sri Krishna reveals this knowledge through Bhagavad-gita. Therefore, Bhagavad-gita should be accepted 'as it is' without interpretation, deletion or addition." Continued: http://www.indiadivine.org/articles/59/ ... Page1.html

It is a variant of this " most strong argument": we are fulled, we sticked in this material world therefore we only must to listen guru and to chant Hare Krishna. We don't must to think.
But it doesn't answer on this question: why did Prabhupada confirm that nobody could contact directly Krishna, only through guru, although it was not truth.
What is self-realized, pure soul? When man come to ISSCON, he is fulled, then he chant Hare Krishna, but he is still fulled, then he become a president of some temple, and he is already not such fulled, but however fulled. Then JBC fixes him to be guru and he stopes to be fulled and become pure, self-realized soul, and his disciples only can contact Krishna through him.
How it seems to me, self-realized, pure soul is such soul who realizes himself as spiritual being, who has the real connection with Godness, with Radha-Krishna. This is not that man who chanted Hare Krishna by definite quantity of times, who sold definite quantity of Prabhupada's books, who has definite quantity of disciples, who exactly quotes Prabhupada's words and so on. It can to help to become "pure", but may be not.
Good teacher helps his disciple to know all that he knows self and even to go further. I had wonderful teacher in violin when I studied in a conservatoire. He was the magnificent violinist. At first he interrupted me in every time and did not allow me to play even one bad note. He showed me how it should sound, but then he always explained why he did this and that and how he did it. One time he asked me :" do you know why I discuss every note with you? I want you would understand principles, mechanisms of what I do, how I play.I want you would become independent on me and in end you would play better than I". But in the last year when I learned all what he wanted to teach me ,he listened how I plaied with respect and interest, he allowed me to search my own ways, he considered with my opinion , he treated to me as to independent musician. -He was very good teacher and he gave me very much.
Somebody can say that spiritual and "material" knowledge passes itself by different ways but I think that most qualities of teacher are same.
If the goal of guru is the help of disciple to become self-realized soul why doesn't he teach how he self contacts Radha-Krishna, why doesn't he develop the ability of disciple to connect with Them and to receive Them instruction, why does he do his desciple dependent on him? And there are many "why"

Indeed in many points it seems we are of the same opinion. And that should be in my opinion also the reason why I or anyone of you may write something in this forum or provide us with some quotes from Prabhupada or of someone else. Namely to give you the posibility to form our own opinion in regard to the suibject or person under discussion. That is the liberal view I like and which is also accepted nowadays in many parts of the world. In ISKCON we fooled ourself with the thought that there exists indeed something like a ultimate or "authoritative" view in regard to many things. In fact what we deed was that we accepted everything in fact on pure faith in some person or some scripures or something else of this kind.

And also the position of the so called guru how it started to be viewed especially in the West is something belonging probably more in the realm of our fantazy than the actual reality of things. When Krishna speaks in the Gita of the self realized soul which one should try to listen to, I would say he was speaking probably from another view on such a person than of what we may have concocted ourself in ISKCON or any other organization of this kind. And I would say someone who knows how and what kind of concocted or invented expectations are invested in the position and the person of the guru nowadays and still continues to present himself as such to his disciples is factually just cheating probaly himself and those who follow and listen to him probably as well. I cannot imagine that what was understood as a so called guru a few thousend years ago and what is understood of such a person today is the same. A few thousend years ago there was definitally no such a school education of today and the knowledge of today was probably also lacking. The guru was I guess a more or lesss nice and simple fellow who was inteligent and capable enough to geve some education to the young generation of people put by their parents under his guidance. When Krishna and Balarama ended then their education under their guru they offered him afterwords a very interesting present. You may know the story otherwise I can write it to you in my next writing. And I guess what you would like to know is best answered by Hari since he was discussing this issue as you could also read with Prabhupada ones. What I could say regarding this issue you know in the meantime already.

I like when you write what you think self but don't quote somebody else. It is more interestingly.
I have my answer. People come to ISSCON because they want to contact God and because they feel their spiritual nature, their purity. They come not for what they would bow front a photo of Prabhupada. But the goal of Prabhupada was to not let go them from this organization.( it seems to me, he thought that only strong spirit organization could rescue the world in that time). Then he (he was very clever) made so: he called in question their purity and spiritual nature, he pointed out on most unprotected part of people-on their part connected with innermost desires and with their sexuality.(all this people were very young, but young people easily feel shame and guilt because their sexuality, and usually they are idealists) .He told him that they need long process of clearance from their soiling( read: from their sexuality). Then he told that they can't contact Krishna directly until they have some desires(read:never),therefore they need a guru very much in order have some connection with Divine. This was brilliant decision, he got many servants who was ready to do all that he ordered because their sincere desire to arrive at Krishna on the one hand and their shame and guilt on the other hand. He created this strong organization but he sacrificed destinies of this people for it.
This is my opinion. May be, I am wrong, I don't know something. May be somebody will correct me.

I think what Hari does now is more honestly

Nanda-grama wrote:I like when you write what you think self but don't quote somebody else. It is more interestingly.

I find quoting what someone said very interesting. It gives one the posibility to know someone and his mind setting better, in my opinion. See: Baltimore sun story published today which is full of quotes.


Obama say prime goal was 'to be a good father'
By Paul West, June 20, 2009


- Barack Hussein and his father, also named Barack Obama


Washington, USA (AP) -- President Barack Obama, speaking in highly personal terms as the son of an absentee father, devoted much of his workday Friday to promoting the importance of parental commitment and mentoring.

Celebrities from the worlds of music and sports joined the president at the start of Father's Day weekend for what Obama called the beginning of a national conversation about fatherhood and personal responsibility. "I decided that if I could be one thing in life, it would be to be a good father," he told a White House audience, after saying that his father's decision to walk away from his family had left "a hole in a child's heart" that couldn't be filled.

Obama spoke after five men, including a former addict from Baltimore, described their own struggles. The president said there was "no rule that says that you have to repeat your father's mistakes." Adults who were deserted by a parent "have an obligation to break the cycle" and "do better than they did, with your own children," he said. Joe Jones, 50, founder of the Center for Urban Families in Baltimore and a prominent advocate for inner-city fathers, described his 17-year struggle with heroin and cocaine addiction that began at age 13, not long after his family broke apart. Jones thanked Obama for making fatherhood issues a priority and said that "the right kind of support systems and the right kind of public policies" can overcome problems "that attack young men's ability to manage their own behavior."

Later, during a question-and-answer session with members of the East Room audience, Jones asked Obama about his decision to run for president with two young daughters at home. "Frankly, I don't think we would have made the same decision if our kids were a little older," the president said. "Sasha was 5. Malia was 8. And they were still in Chicago. They had my mother-in-law, and they had a whole network and a community and a family that could help and support them."

In response to another question, Obama drew on his biography to underscore the importance of adult influence on young people. Obama's Kenyan father deserted the family when his son was 2, and reappeared briefly when he was 10. Still, the president said yesterday, that fleeting encounter "in the few weeks that I was with him" made an impact. Obama, a basketball enthusiast and jazz fan, said that his father gave him his first basketball and took him to his first jazz concert. "I didn't remember this until later on in life, but just that imprint is powerful. And imagine if that's sustained every day," the president said.

Ed Gordon, a former Black Entertainment Television host, thanked Obama for promoting his family in the news media. The Obamas have been particularly agreeable to cover stories in publications aimed at African-American readers. "The image is so powerful," said Gordon, and that has made it easier to persuade young men to become more involved with their children. Vice President Joe Biden added praise of his own. "Mr. President, you're a great President. You're a great dad," Biden said. "And you're really good to be doing this. It's a big deal," he said, to applause from the invited guests.

Obama did not announce any new government initiatives but did take several hours out of his schedule to highlight a variety of public, private and faith-based organizations. He made a quick trip to a Northern Virginia nonprofit, Year Up Inc., a job-training program for young urban adults. And later, he played host to a picnic for young men from the Washington area, with rib-eye steaks grilled on the South Lawn by celebrity chef Bobby Flay. On hand were many of the celebrities who had taken part in the day's events, including NBA players Dwayne Wade of the Miami Heat and Etan Thomas of the Washington Wizards; Pittsburgh Steelers coach Bill Cowher and Antwaan Randle El of the Washington Redskins; hip-hop artist Darryl "DMC" McDaniels; and Tony Hawk, described by the president as the best skateboarder in the world.
___


Dialectics teaches: "There is allways more than one way to see a situation, and more than one way to solve a problem." More...

Did you pour here so much word'r water in order to show that you sow this situation differently? But how? Can you say?

An interesting question which shows that you are interested to know something more deeply. For example taking the title from above where it s stated: "Obama say prime goal was 'to be a good father" Now as you wrote to me ones, you are a woman not a man as I was deducing ones wrongly. So you are by nature a hopefully loving mother to your children, therefore what is being said in the quotation by the author of the article above, you may say is not exactly true or may not really aply to you or your understanding or experiences in life. To be a good mother is also a prime goal in the education of children or even a better one. In this way what someone may say may not really apply to you or fit to your experiences and parentel understanding rather you may take what is being said in a certain quotation as a simple information and nothing more. You and your opinion remains in this way uneffected. Did you understand my point of view?

I understand that you want to say. But I should confess when I speak with a man who quotes pages of newspapers in order to express his simple thought I begin to be bored. And then, although I am very nice to Obama, I think that if I will want to know what he eated yesterday on breakfast, I can read newspapers, but this forum is the unique place where we can discuss spiritual questions. And how it seems to me, most value in this is an exchange of our experience, own feelings, a possibility for everybody to express himself by such what he is indeed. It is the most value. Any information we can find in other places.
I was carried away by this topic "why" very much, but now I am bored.(May be, was it your goal?)

Today there was very nice lecture and meditation of Hari

What Obama may have said or what Hari may have said is not really the point here I guess. Rather in my opinion it is what we may think, understand and accept as valuable for us after reading or listening to that what someone may have said or did. Than we could say that we remain true to ourself and what we may say, follow or write is our own understanding, conclusion or opinion. Otherwise I may be just be a 'manipulative puppet' in the hands of the media or of a 'pure,' 'self-realized' or 'mystic' 'puppet master.'

You write "this forum is the unique place where we can discuss spiritual questions" and what can be more "spiritual," more personal than our own opinion, point of view, or personal understanding even while one may be quoting what someone may have said or written in order to ilustrate or back up ones own point of view. I would say we should avoid to fall in the same "boring" conception some of us may remember from the past where one may make a distinction of what is spiritual and what is material, what is acceptable or what is not acceptable to being written or quoted in order to be considered a "spiritual" information or have some "value" on this forum. Information as such when presented factual and objective is what it is, a simple information and a quotation or lecture given by someone I would say also. It all depends on us as spiritual beings on how we may direct or instruct our mind to value or judge the information we may come to know from somewhere or someone in order to come to our own conclusions and understanding. Or take it as just an information and nothing more.

This liberal or more personal point of view stands in stark contrast to the more authoritarian or even totalitarian one practiced before in the media in some Eastern countries or some religious organizations and communities of today, where the free expression of ones opinion was or is hindered in one way or another and the information was or is censured according to what some state authorities considered valuable or fit to be published or distributed or what some people may consider to be somehow "authoritative" or judje, in their spiritual understanding, as valuable according to what someone may have said or did or may be written somewhere.

To patronize or act as a guardian for someone in such a way may be important while in school or a so called brahmacary in the school of the guru, the Gurukula of the ancient times, but as a general practice in life it is in my opinion not very good or doesn't really serve the right purpose.

Nandajee your question is real, why,,?
The sect people have there firm faith about that .
But i have my understanding.
I think we should try to understand the time factor and situation.
Generaly it is abviously wrong to said like that ,i am sure anybody any time can conect with God without any mediator he should just have desire that all and clear understanding whom he is conecting.
Desires twisting the attention of soul in the time when they are
urgantly needed to satisfied.
And if somebody filled with desires all the time he just will not have time to pay attention to God since God is not his desire.
And sometime people making asterites to get over from
different desires since they becoming like uwanted guests all the time.But this one way to look on that the other way if satisfy his desires then he can turn his attention to God and wath is wronge with that.
In this warld sometime people for satisfying there desires some desires spending years and more so all there intentions and attention is turned to that goal.
But we also hae the examle of Chitraketu Maharaja the king of the
gandharvas he had milion wifes ,for wath? he also was in firm contact with Lord and there are so many examles so evrything is not so simple as the scts think.


Now times is realy changed and people are complitly different by the way only blinds cannot see that.
Even if we look on Pandavas they also had desires.See Arjuna who can say that he had no desires.But when he needed even Arjuna made austerites to see Lord Shiva.
But in the case that you wrote it seem that traditional Gurus for acomplishing there goals needs to have a lot of dependant people
and to make them dependant the best is to say that without them you will never conect God.It is the most powerful argument to make every body dependent in idealistic societes.
Also we should consider that the most people who came to Iscon was Hipys and mainly people like that ,you can not see yogis there
and himalayan babas ,so to make them purifyed from tama gun
Prabhupad made them dependant like a father when the child is
small need that the child feel dependansy then he can teach him
and so on.
But the real problem is arising when coming the time when the child becoming grown adult and still remaining in childhood depandancy
then this is becoming the real hinderence for growth.
See in the nature all animals when the chid becoming adult they throw them out for independant life God made like that.
In peoples sosiety also it is like that only in ISCON and other sects evrybody forever
in deep childhood in total dependansy.
Can you imagine when the small chiken became grown han
and still following there chiken mother like a small chiken all rest of the life
Real Gurus- spiritualist never making there desciples totaly dependent on them .Who have eyes he
can see.
But i think Prabhupada had other goals in that moment when that intervew was he needs an army complitly dependant from him people so for that it was maybe nessary.