Comments Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa

Displaying 1 To 10 Of 397 Comments

Black Holes And Gaping Mouths

Part Two:

Here is further evidence that our cosmos comes from the Mahat-tattva and not directly from Pradhana, although Pradhana supplies all the ingredients for it:

Thus, after manifesting variegatedness, the effulgent mahat-tattva, which contains all the universes within itself, which is the root of all cosmic manifestations and which is not destroyed at the time of annihilation, swallows the darkness that covered the effulgence at the time of dissolution”. (SB 3.26.20)

The appearance of our universe from a ready-made egg-shaped globe sounds a lot more orderly than an assumed detonation from nothing or something indescribable. This appears to be more difficult trying to correlate with the big-bang theory.

If we see how Space-time (Three dimensions plus time) is the full spectrum of scientific observation at present, this will not include us living entities as conscious observers, what to speak of a Supremely conscious observer. Since these observers are undetected by Space-time calculations and that the Supreme observer sets in motion universal creation with Lord Brahma who is also undetected because he is made of intelligence, we are still talking about what is for scientists and physicists, something indescribable.

Such a description as this might not go down well with scientists at all. But to possibly help them get some correlation between theirs and the Vedic version of origins of our cosmos, we can refer to the Pradhana, which by the way, is what some say is the destination for voidists and sunyavadis, i.e.; Buddhists. If this can foster an understanding and help to bridge wide disparities, then it will be useful.

I hope this is useful.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 03.08.2014 @ 22:17

Part One:

Sita Rama Prabhu,

Thank you. The idea of Pradhana being the origin of our universe sounds reasonable when trying to get as close to a super dense Absolute Zero or Singularity, as assumed by scientists and physicists. What they think is quite similar to this:

“In the unmanifest stage of material nature, called pradhana, there is no expression of words, no mind and no manifestation of the subtle elements beginning from the mahat, nor are there the modes of goodness, passion and ignorance. There is no life air or intelligence, nor any senses or demigods. There is no definite arrangement of planetary systems, nor are there present the different stages of consciousness - sleep, wakefulness and deep sleep. There is no ether, water, earth, air, fire or sun. The situation is just like that of complete sleep, or of voidness. Indeed, it is indescribable. Authorities in spiritual science explain, however, that since pradhana is the original substance, it is the actual basis of material creation.” (SB 12.4.20-21)

Just as the computers of scientists and physicists cannot describe what existed before the supposed universal detonation, because it has no mathematical description, the above Pradhana is also “indescribable”.

However, Pradhana is not the immediate cause of our universe. From Pradhana comes the Mahat-tattva, and this is where all universes come from:

“When the three modes of nature are agitated, the resultant transformation appears as the element false ego in three phases — goodness, passion and ignorance. Generated from the mahat-tattva, which is itself produced from the unmanifest pradhana, this false ego becomes the cause of all material illusion and duality”. (SB 11.22.33)

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 03.08.2014 @ 22:09

Prosperity of the Earth Culture

I appreciate this article especially because it is from a sannyasa speaking of the need for essential family relations. This is responsible sannyasa in the context of our greater ISKCON family. When sannyasis encourage devotee families this way, then they are integrated members of our ISKCON family and will be an inspiration. This is more acceptable than the promotion of artificial detachment and celibacy.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 03.08.2014 @ 22:06

The Chorus Of One-siders

Sita Rama Prabhu,

You asked what I thought of your latest ‘both-sides’ comments. I say they are a refreshing and welcome addition to that discussion. This can create a platform from where an official stance on the fall / no fall issue can appease and satisfy both sides. Well done!

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 10.07.2014 @ 15:22

Part Two:

Compare the above reasonableness with mode of passion competitiveness: “But such and such acarya said this, therefore it is correct…No matter what acarya you quoted, this is the answer…that is nonsense, you have destroyed your credibility because all the evidence points to this…all the rest of the devotees are gullible and naïve for believing in that, when the obvious conclusion is right here before your eyes…”

How can we pit our one-sidedness against the enlightened opinions of acaryas who say differently on different matters? So what type of “competitive debating” are you referring to? One can be competive in none-negotiable situations, but not where acaryas have sided on both sides.

If your idea of competitiveness is used to justify winning just for the sake of it, that is also raja-guna. Because to be competitive means to compete, the question is, to compete for what? How can we compete with the opinions of our acaryas? However, we can consider the differing opinions made and not minimise them. If we become one-sided in these situations, we minimise one or other acaryas.

If we compete against the opinions of our acaryas, our competitiveness ceases to be competitive – it becomes tamo-guna offence-laden reputation upkeep that exposes our lack of Vaisnava discretion. If you intend to be competitive, it has to applied to the correct circumstance.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 07.07.2014 @ 14:24

Part One:

Sita Rama Prabhu,

Thank you for your compliments in placing me as a “both-sider” or “multi-sider”. I deliberately choose to be a both-sider or multi-sider in certain circumstances, not all.

Cases where we can demonstrate “one-sidedness” are in situations where none-negotiable issues surface, like challenging the minimum of 16 rounds daily, warning of prematurely jumping to raga-bhatki when not qualified, and the need in pointing out mayavada tendencies and so on.

In cases where there are ongoing debates in which our acaryas have lent opinion, like this jiva fall case and others, it is wise that we remain both-siders or multi-siders. To be a one-sider in the face of acarya evidence differing from us can reveal our foolishness.

This is where your “competitive debate” position needs to be corrected. If we choose to be competitive where acaryas have supported both sides of a discussion by being one-sided and favouring one side only, in a competitive way - that is also foolish.

Srila Prabhupada often cited the example of the gopis of Vrndvaana in terms of ideal competitiveness. Do we ever read where ‘rivals’ gopis complain, “Oh no! Srimati Radharani has pleased Krishna first?” Spiritual rendition of competition is where all others are acknowledged and glorified for pleasing Krishna.

If we transfer this rendition to how we can properly hold “competitive” debates, then we shall see more of, “Valid point Prabhu, but how does that reconcile with my position?…Really good observation Mataji, and you quoted such and such acarya, but how does that fit in with this that is also quoted by such and such acarya?…I guess we’ll have to accept both points…I am still not fully purified in consciousness yet to give a definitive stance…perhaps if I attain bhava I might have a totally different perspective…but let us acknowledge all those differing opinions…they can help broaden my own outlook…”

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 07.07.2014 @ 14:17

Husband as Guru

I appreciate this article as it breaks ground and dispels stereotypical Prabhu/master role expectations. It is important information. Many marriages face difficulties in the early stages, because there is uncertainty about which role or which partner fits in, in the home, or in the relationship.

Such uncertainties can appear as behind-the-scenes tussles. After some time, couples will realise that each partner will yield to each other’s space requirements in pursuits of their interests in living and practicing Krishna consciousness. It is preferred that this happens sooner.

Happier devotee couples allow each other such space and it helps to broaden the scope of service and family involvement. Without this, there is usually a restrictive and narrow definitions of role making that causes continual unease and unhappiness, especially when the Master role is misused.

Thank you, ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 27.05.2014 @ 21:16

Resting The Jiva-Fall / No-Fall Case

We are observing a sort of turning point within this discussion. Some recent comments have acknowledged the need to accommodate both sides of this otherwise inconclusive exercise. This is encouraging.

Some years ago I read Drutakarma Prabhu’s contribution paper on this matter. If my memory serves me correctly, he also considered the various viewpoints given by different acaryas and concluded that because we are followers of Srila Prabhupada, we should rest our case with him. The perception created by this could appear one-sided.

This is a sensible approach but it does not acknowledge more deeply how Srila Prabhupada did say we fell and did not fall simultaneously. The impression created by this is that it appears that Srila Prabhupada is presenting something a little different, but we still accept that as final.

This approach does not fully represent the views of other acaryas. If any young impressionable devotees were to read this, they will likely conclude that, “Yes, Srila Prabhupada is right because he is our param-siksa guru…and our other acaryas are incorrect…” While there is nothing wrong with such sentiments for Srila Prabhupada, it can cause problems if those worthy sentiments minimise the views of our other acaryas on the matter.

Such minimisation is not good for our spiritual progress and it can also create a perception among ‘outsiders’ that we are somewhat ‘elitist’ in such following. In other words, if this is an official ISKCON stance on the matter then this could be qualified with an understanding of being inclusive. Failing this, then perhaps some revision is in order that gives our correct inclusive, none-minimalistic presentation that will be valid for generations to come.

If my assessment is incorrect, I stand to be corrected.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 10.07.2014 @ 15:28

Part Three:

This discussion we generate heated feelings. The fact remains, considering the above quotes, we still have to say that Srila Prabhupada was right on both the Fall / no-fall phenomena. For example, when Srila Jiva Goswami espoused Svarakiya as opposed to parakiya, was he wrong for doing this? No. The Sastric orthodoxy will disagree.

In the same way, why should Srila Prabhupada be wrong to say “we were originally with Krishna in His lila” if this message is intended for a particular time, place and circumstance, Uttama Sloka Prabhu? Because you contend that both the fall / no-fall versions can never be right.

If Srila Jiva Goswami was right to do what he did, then why not Srila Prabhupada as well? By saying that both sides can never be right, and since you follow the no-fall versions, then the other side must be wrong. Was Srila Prabhupada wrong to say we fell, Uttama Sloka Prabhu? We have not seen this word “Wrong” used thus far, but that is the implication.

Once again, seeing the futility of arguing back and forth and reaching no consensus, it should rest with Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu who indicated that, in spite of our theory of where we come from, be it tastastha or other places, we still need to realise such facts with solid vijnana. This is not speculation.

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 05.06.2014 @ 22:11

Part Two;

At the same time, Srila Prabhupada would point out various differences between acaryas’ statements on certain subjects, but would not outright take sides. He would speak of the merits of each case, like we see below:

“According to Sripada Sridhara Svami, the original commentator on the Bhagavatam, there is not always a devastation after the change of every Manu. And yet this inundation after the period of Caksusa Manu took place in order to show some wonders to Satyavrata. But Sri Jiva Gosvami has given definite proofs from authoritative scriptures (like Visnu-dharmottara, Markandeya Purana, Harivamsa, etc.) that there is always a devastation after the end of each and every Manu. Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti has also supported Srila Jiva Gosvami, and he (Sri Cakravarti) has also quoted from Bhagavatamrta about this inundation after each Manu. Apart from this, the Lord, in order to show special favour to Satyavrata, a devotee of the Lord, in this particular period, incarnated Himself.” (SB 1.3.15 purport)

We a;so observe that His Divine Grace was not opposed to there being differing viewpoints because as our acaryas are individuals with various opinions, and so are we who might want to espouse what we feel is correct:

“As for your question about Santa Rasa and the opinions of Rupa Goswami and Sridhara Swami, I don’t remember. You can send me the appropriate passages. There is no reason why Acaryas cannot differ on certain points.” (Letter to Upendra / 19 February 1972)

“Wherever there are individuals there is bound to be difference of opinion.” (Letter to Rupanuga / 14 February 1973)

“So far as your question about controversy amongst the disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja, that is a fact. But this controversy is not material. Just like in a national program, different political parties are sometimes in conflict and make propaganda against each other, but their central point is always service to the country. Similarly, amongst the disciples of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati there may be some controversy, but the central point is how to preach the mission of His Divine Grace. If the central point is fixed up then there is no harm in such controversy. Every individual being must have his opinion; that is the significance of individuality, but all such differences of opinions must coincide in Krishna.” (Letter to Mandali Bhadra / 28 July 1969)

Ys Kesava Krsna Dasa.

Comment Posted By Kesava Krsna dasa On 05.06.2014 @ 22:08


Next Page »

Pages (40) :
Last »

«« Back to the Comments Members Stats Page

«« Back to the Dandavats Website General Stats Page

  • Post Details

Author: Administrator Administrator's website Administrator's email
Post Date: Saturday, October 7th, 2006
Categories: Articles
Trackback: Trackback
  • Last update: Mon September 29

  • Who is online

    • 32 currently online
    • 170 maximum concurrent
    • 12218836 total visitors

    Registered users online

anantadas -
  • Registered users: 6403

  • Navigation

  • BC VTE Bhakti Sastri Online
  • Bhaktimarga Swami's blog
  • Bhaktivedanta Book Trust
  • Bhaktivedanta College
  • Bhaktivedanta Institute (Alachua)
  • Bhaktivedanta Manor
  • Bhaktivedanta VedaBase Network
  • Bhaktivedanta Vedabase Online
  • Cooking with Kurma
  • Darshan of SS Radha-Londonisvara
  • Dharmapatnis
  • Diary of a Traveling Preacher
  • Euro GBC
  • Forbidden Archeology
  • Gaudiya Vaisnava texts
  • Indradyumna Swami Media
  • ISKCON Bangalore Official
  • ISKCON Deity Worship Ministry
  • ISKCON Health & Welfare Ministry
  • ISKCON Ministry of Educational Development
  • ISKCON's Congregational Development Ministry
  • Iskcon-desire-tree
  • Jayadvaita Swami's personal site
  • Krishna Dharma's website
  • Krishna Lila Entertainment
  • Mayapur Academy
  • Mayapur Days
  • Mayapur International School
  • Ministry of Educational Development
  • Our Spiritual Journey
  • Parisisvara
  • Radio Krsna Central
  • Saligrama Sila site
  • Sridham Mayapura
  • The Bhaktivedanta Archives
  • The ISKCON Sannyasa Ministry
  • The Official GBC site
  • The official website of Radhanatha Swami
  • Trivikrama Swami
  • Vaisnava Calendar
  • Vaisnava Calendar Reminder
  • Vaisnava care website
  • Vanipedia
  • Vedic Astrologer
  • Vedic knowledge online
  • Vedic view on controversial issues
  • Website in Bengali language
  • Yadunandana Swami's personal site
  • Alachua Temple Live Podcast
  • Comments by author
  • Donate through searching
  • Founder Acarya
  • Incoming Links
  • Iskcon News TV Channel
  • Iskcon Radio stations
  • Iskcon Universe Feed
  • Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
  • Krishna conscious "youtube"
  • Krishna Conscious Media
  • Most commented articles
  • Most read articles
  • New Dwaraka Archived Lectures
  • Polls
  • Stats
  • Temple webcams
  • Thanks!
  • The last seven day's most read articles
  • Prabhupada Now book
  • Bhaktivedanta Manor Introductory Course for Women, UK
  • Detroit ISKCON Celebrates Pushpa Abhishek Festival
  • Preaching in South Korea
  • We are all Hare Krishnas now, meditation goes mainstream
  • WSN August 2014 - World Sankirtan Newsletter
  • New book publication from the Bhaktivedanta Academy: Defeating Vatsasura
  • SRI MURARI GUPTA - A Very Intimate Associate of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
  • Right intention attracts Krishna
  • Vrajavadhus Logo Contest

    "Artwork and photos courtesy of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, Inc. Used with permission"