Firstly, the word “Malinadu” should be “Malenadu” “e” as in “a” in ate.

Secondly, “Gidda” does not mean “Plant”. Gidda means dwarf.

“Gida” where “d” as in d in “Radon” means plant; and “Gidda” where “dd” as
in dd in “armageddon” means dwarf.

So Malenadu Gidda means, dwarf variety of Malenadu place.

SORRY FOR THE CONFUSION

RP Bhakti Raghava Swami

As to the claim that we are unique because we have bhakti, please consider the following quotes:

Srila Prabhupada: Even the Muslim religion. That is also bhakti-yoga (devotional service). Any religion where God is the target, that is applied in bhakti (devotion). (Lecture on Bhagavad-gita, 21/02/69)

Srila Prabhupada: Bhakti-yoga also exists among the Muslims, because God is the target in the Muslim religion. (Path of Perfection)

Srila Prabhupada: There are many prayers in the Vedic scriptures and also in the Bible and the Qur’an. Although the Christians and Muslims do not worship the Deity, they offer prayers to the Lord, that is also bhakti. (Teachings of Lord Chaitanya, Ch. 15)

Srila Prabhupada: The Christians and the Muslims, they offer vandanam (prayers). Although they do not worship the Deity, but they offer prayers to the Lord. That is also good. That is also bhakti. (Lecture on Srimad Bhagavatam, 04/12/74)

Srila Prabhupada: They accept God. They are also our brothers because they accept God. They are not atheist. Atheists don’t accept God. “There is no God,” says the atheist. But here they are theists. They accept God. They want to please God. They go to the church, go to the mosque, offer prayers. Prayer is also bhakti, devotional service. The Christian way or the Muslim way is to offer prayer. The Muslims offer obeisances and offer prayer. So that is also bhakti (devotion). The Christians also do that, so that is also bhakti. And they accept God; we accept God. So there is no difference. But the only point is who is that God. (Room conversation. Tehran, 14/03/75)

However the anthropic principle raises questions of probabilities, where we can ask the abstract question of what possible universes could exist if our ability to observe it were not a given. Scientists have calculated possible ranges for the forces of the universe, for example if gravity were to weak or too strong, our bodies could not have formed.

Of all the variables, the cosmological constant is such an incredibly tiny number with such a small functional range that the anthropic principle requires a multiverse of virtually unlimited other universes in order to have enough chances to randomly produce a universe capable of supporting conceivable life.

Of course, Vedic texts indicate a multiverse, but materialist scientists cannot show any other universe, so they can’t support their theory that life doesn’t need God to exist.

The same applies to “strictness.” It might help novice Bhakti-yogis rise to higher levels of Bhakti, but it does not constitute pure unadulterated Bhakti – it is simply a means to get there. Still, the common knowledge of strictness itself has no relevance to pure Bhakti.

If this information were implemented by Iskcon for example, and it helped to fortify membership numbers at least, then we can say it is helping us indirectly on a human social scale. Therefore, this common information belongs to the realm of jnana and karma, distinct from pure Bhakti.

If we are to mix such information with pure Bhakti and not notice the difference, then we are contaminated in subtle ways.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Sita Rama Prabhu,

Here are some further observations on your comment 9.

You wrote: “But I want to point out that is certainly possible for, “mundane” scholars to determine whether a religious organization focuses more on concepts that are outside the boundaries of the material world or more on social/ethical considerations.”

Iskcon is not a “religious organisation.” If you lump in Iskcon with other “religious organisations” then you are equating Srila Prabhupada;s society for Bhakti-yogis with others. Srila Prabhupada makes a clear distinction:

“So these things are very nice. I will request you to study what is bhakti, what is pure devotion, what is Vāsudeva. Everything is there. It is a science, great science. It is not sentiment, neither it is so- called religious faith.” (Delhi, November 13, 1973)

If this empirical research was “massive,” as you wrote, then even if the study was gargantuan, and immensely colossal, it still has no power to touch independent Bhakti.

Then you say, “Thus the study is relevant to Bhakti because it is undeniable that accepting a scripture as absolute and accepting prohibitions, which restrict the spirit of sense enjoyment, are requisites for developing Bhakti.”

This study has no relevance whatsoever to Independent, Distinct pure Bhakti. It is co-incidental, incidental empirical information concluded by indifferent none-Bhakti sources. This is distant jnana.

It is common worldy knowledge that if we want order and following obedience, whether in schools, in the military, in God-fearing religions, then strictness is required. Such common knowledge has no relevance to pure Bhakti.

For instance, it is common knowledge that if people take regular walks it might help keep their vascular system healthy. Such, knowledge has nothing to do with pure Bhakti. Now, Srila Prabhupada took the advice of one good doctor who recommended that he walk more often. These regular walks might have helped to keep Srila Prabhupada around physically for longer than anticipated. Are we to say that this acting on common knowledge means that brisk walking is relevant to pure Bhakti? No.

However, because it helped Srila Prabhupada we can say that the good doctor engaged in ajnata-sukrti, and the walking information itself helped unintentionally - it had some use in Bhakti – but it did not constitute pure Bhakti in itself.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Of course, Iskcon means the international society for Krishna consciousness, which is a individual state of consciousness in relation to guru and Krishna.

Devotees are definitely not dogmatic institutionalists. We utilise Iskcon like we utilise the rest of the world; in guru & Krishna’s service.

To the degree that we endeavour to develop ourselves spiritually, to become religious, to maintain a renounced life, and to deliberate on and discuss jnana, we desire our own pratishtha (honour and distinction). This desire contaminates our hearts and pollutes our characters.

Although we make a great effort to control lust, anger, greed, illusion and envy, and although we perform severe austerities to control the senses, concealed within our hearts the desire for pratishtha, in the form of a wild infant animal, continues to grow.”

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur also explains in his ‘Bhakti Tattva Viveka’ that “Until one awakens to the platform of pure devotion he’s not really able to see other’s level of bhakti”. He saiys that, “As long as one has a mere reflection of bhakti, he is unable to discern who has real bhakti and who has just a similar reflection.”

My previous response to the 2nd question you posed was very generous. It requires a more stringent response. Your question was:

2) The argument conflates ISKCON with Bhakti, which seems as unwarranted. ISKCON is an institution, Bhakti is the eternal function of the soul, and Bhakti-Yoga is the science of reviving or executing that function. While there is overlap, they cannot be considered the same in every respect.

Iskcon is a multi-faceted preaching mission. All sphered of service activity encompass the various limbs of Bhakti. Iskcon is a Bhakti mission for Bhakti-yogis of varying degrees of spiritual progress. How is this unwarranted?

As if to divorce Iskcon from Bhakti, you wrote: “ISKCON is an institution, Bhakti is the eternal function of the soul, and Bhakti-Yoga is the science of reviving or executing that function.” This is inconsistent.

It should be remembered that wherever there is Bhakti, there is hearing, chanting and other angas of engagement. Bhakti comes first. If there is no Bhakti, there is no hearing and chanting… If Iskcon incorporates all these angas of engagement, then how is Bhakti divorced from Iskcon? Why again is this unwarranted?

Certain observations might reveal what you say is “overlap” and therefore, “cannot be considered the same in every respect.” Depending on what you observe, you might witness apparent inconsistencies not in line with Bhakti, but it does not divorce Bhakti from Iskcon.

Associating with devotees via this Dandavats forum is enabled by Bhakti, for Sadhu sanga is another anga of Bhakti. You chant your rounds daily, and this is also Bhakti given. Can you explain this divorce?

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

In response to your comment 9, I have already said that our human side can be compared with people of other faiths – but there is nothing unique in this. But try comparing such data with devotees who serve under the protection of the Lord, then I say that they are beyond empirical scruples, and beyond comparison, just as pure distinct Bhakti is.

Other factors have to be considered, such as following strictly in an Abrahamic tradition due to fear of God. Such fear can cause worshipers to be strict, without true love. How can this compare with Bhakti, the path of love? There might be some element of fear and obligation in Vaidi-Bhakti, but then, such devotees have a no-fear fondness for Lord Nrsmha for example. Usually, our youngsters love Sri Nrsmhadeva. Such a personal exchange as this is commonly absent where fear of God predominates.

To compare the level of consciousness between serious Bhakti-yogis and once-a-week church attendees also cannot be compared. Personally I find it offensive for a society of Bhakti-yogis to be lumped together with some of those who believe that this material body of ours is the soul.

These considerations cannot produce consistent data when comparing with Bhakti. Otherwise the objective of your article appears to be similar.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

The SB 8.5.23 purport has this before already quoted part:

“When Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu appeared, He ushered in the era for the sańkīrtana movement. It is also said that for ten thousand years this era will continue.”

Similarly, in CC Antya 3.50:

“ It is said that the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement will be prominent within the next ten thousand years, but after that people will all become mlecchas and yavanas.

And then there’s this:

Room Conversation — April 5, 1977, Bombay:
Girirāja: As Your Divine Grace had said, that due to the saṅkīrtana movement an auspicious atmosphere is being created all over the world. So is it not possible that at least for the time being things will improve?

Prabhupāda: Oh, yes. Improve. Not for the time being. For ten thousand years.

Girirāja: Yes. Out of 427,000 years I was taking that 10,000 as for the time being.

Prabhupāda: It is nothing sport.(?)

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, where is the mention of that ten thousand years?

Prabhupāda: That I have heard it. Maybe in the Bhāgavata. Such a nice thing. Alone in this world I am struggling, and the so-called intelligent persons, they will not come. They have business. Why? If it is actually beneficial to the human society, why I should alone try? I will go on trying so long I’ll live. There will be no checking of…

Dandavats, jaya Srila Prabhupada.

Yes, you are right, there is a similarity with the thrust of your article. I had to bring in the principle of Bhakti as a reason why scholarly material, whether it agrees with our ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ views, is still flawed – from an independent Bhakti perspective.

When I used the “flawed” word in comments on your article, it was because not a shred of Bhakti featured in such scholarly deliberations. It was not intended for you as an author. Please forgive me if you might have felt that way. It was also intended for a show of support for this because it appeared to bolster the ‘conservative’ cause. If such support exists without resort to Bhakti or just for the sake of it, then it is sentiment, not Bhakti.

If we show how Iskcon preservation can best be safeguarded by speaking of the uniqueness of Bhakti rather than indifferent scholarly input – useful or not – then we are in broad agreement.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

one retired physics teacher (M.A.)

one registered nurse

one certified English/Social Studies teacher (B.S.)

one MD/PhD (pediatrics and counseling)

one geneticist (Dr.Sc.)

two geologists (B.S.)

one chemist (Ph.D.)

one PhD in religious studies

an accomplished artist

an accomplished musician

a veterinarian

one social scientist (B.S.)

four teachers from the former school

one PhD in mathematics education

Most of these professionals are already in the area. Some are expected to move within the next year or two.

We will be having a fundraiser on August 3rd. Get your checkbook ready!