You can submit your article, report, announcement, ad etc. by mailing to

Comments Posted By Sugriva das

Displaying 1 To 30 Of 43 Comments

A Happy Wife Has a Good Husband

part 2

Our ISKCON members who are affected by secular values are fond of declaring that because they are “devotees,” the negative depiction of women given by Srila Prabhupada does not apply to devotee women as it would to ordinary women. But is this true? In his purport, Srila Prabhupada specifically says “Krsna conscious grhasthas must be very careful of the sly fox woman.”This directly means that there may be women who associate with devotees (for example, a wife who associates with her devotee husband, or other women who associate with ISKCON devotees) who are “sly fox women.” They may call themselves devotees, but do their actions reflect those of devotees?

I should like to very carefully point out and bring to your full attention that I am not in any way, shape, or form labeling all women in ISKCON, or in society in general as “sly foxes.”

What I am pointing out is that your assumption that scriptural references to women do not apply to women in ISKCON is just plain wrong. Sastric references apply to both members of ISKCON and the general public as well. I for one know that I do not have a Vaikuntha vimana parked in my garage that brought me here to this material world.

One of the most egregious problems in ISKCON is to think that we are a lot more advanced than we really are despite a long history of scandals. So in this case you are putting ISKCON women on a pedestal that history has shown doesn’t exist.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 12:12 pm

Ref #18

Mahatma Prabhu said:

“Also, the above quotations are speaking of ordinary women, not devotee women, so we must be careful not lump the two together.”

I disagree. Let us consider the following verse and purport from Srimad Bhagavatam 9.14.37

“Urvasi said: My dear King, you are a man, a hero. Don’t be impatient and give up your life. Be sober and don’t allow the senses to overcome you like foxes. Don’t let the foxes eat you. In other words, you should not be controlled by your senses. Rather, you should know that the heart of a woman is like that of a fox. There is no use making friendship with women.

“Canakya Pandita has advised, visvaso naiva kartavyah strisu raja-kulesu ca: ‘Never place your faith in a woman or a politician.’ Unless elevated to spiritual consciousness, everyone is conditioned and fallen, what to speak of women, who are less intelligent than men. Women have been compared to sudras and vaisyas (striyo vaisyas tatha sudrah). On the spiritual platform, however, when one is elevated to the platform of Krsna consciousness, whether one is a man, woman, sudra or whatever, everyone is equal. Otherwise, Urvasi, who was a woman herself and who knew the nature of women, said that a woman’s heart is like that of a sly fox. If a man cannot control his senses, he becomes a victim of such sly foxes. But if one can control the senses, there is no chance of his being victimized by sly, fox-like women. Canakya Pandita has also advised that if one has a wife like a sly fox, he must immediately give up his life at home and go to the forest.

mata yasya grhe nasti
bharya capriya-vadini
aranyam tena gantavyam
yatharanyam tatha grham
(Canakya-sloka 57)

“Krsna conscious grhasthas must be very careful of the sly fox woman. If the wife at home is obedient and follows her husband in Krsna consciousness, the home is welcome. Otherwise one should give up one’s home and go to the forest.
hitvatma-patam grham andha-kupam
vanam gato yad dharim asrayeta
(Bhag. 7.5.5)

“One should go to the forest and take shelter of the lotus feet of Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.”



» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 12:10 pm

Ref #18

Mahatma Prabhu said:

Also, the above quotations are speaking of ordinary women, not devotee women, so we must be careful not lump the two together.

This type of reasoning is often given that somehow the women in ISKCON came from Vaikuntha and are very special, that the things said about women in sastra do not apply to them because ISKCON women are above the dualities of material nature, that their intelligence has increased by becoming devotees (and hence are just as intelligent as the men now) etc. This of course is fallacious reasoning because it implies that Bhakti yoga is only effective on females and it is only they who become more intelligent, only they who the scriptures no longer refer whereas scriptural references to men apply to ISKCON men.

Your whole article is addressed not to ordinary men but to devotee men, yet it seems that devotee men have flaws similar to ordinary ones. Whereas devotee women do not have the flaws of ordinary women.

Can you please explain to me why Bhakti yoga only edifies females but not males? Why men who practice Bhakti stay ordinary but the women can walk on water so to speak?

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 11:41 am

To Mahatma ref # 18

You said:

“Although Prabhupada refers to Manu occasionally in his books.”

I opened up my 2013 edition of the VedaBase and checked off anything by Srila Prabhupada and searched for

“Manu” 1048 hits,
“Manu Samhita” 165 hits, and
“Manu Smrti” 35 hits.

The vast majority of the hits for Manu were in reference to Manu Samhita.

So we are talking over 1000 references to Manu. To me that seems a lot more than occasional. So it seems you have a different definition of “occasional” than I do.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 11:21 am

Mahatma wrote in #16

“In one class the children were making noise and they were asked to leave by a senior devotee and Prabhupada said that in this room there are only brahmanas, children, women, and elderly people so no one here is to be faulted.”

I just heard several SP leactures in which children were making a disturbance and Srila Prabhupada asked them to be removed. And just like you can not site a reference for example I also can’t because I never thought I would have to. So it seems that at different times SP did different things.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 10:58 am

Reference # 8

Dear Akuranatha,

Hare Krsna.

Mataji was very polite and humbly asking a question. She was just pointing out and obvious inconsistency and asking for an explanation. And we note she wasn’t asking you but you still had to interject your opinion even though unasked. . And it seems anyone who doesn’t agree with your line of thought is “unfriendly” and that you consider it your prescribed duty as the thought police to rush in and correct them.

It seems to myself and others that you use a “passive aggressive” approach in dealing with those you disagree with it. Hence I normally ignore 99% of your comments because they will be predictable.

And, do you deny that Sria Prabhupada liked his disciples to wear traditional vaisnava attire?

Hari Bol!

Sugriva das

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 10:49 am

Reference #11 & 12

Sorry for delayed response. I seldom visit this website because of limited time.

You asked “Says WHO!” Well if you read my text I explicitly said who:

First I quoted Manu in the Manu Samhita 9.80-81

Srila Prabhupada on numerous occasions said that the Manu Samhita was the Law books of Mankind. If you don’t believe me I can provide references.

And secondly I quoted Lord Visnu from Brahma-vaivarta Purana .

Manu is not only the lawgiver for mankind but also one of the 12 mahajanas. Perfectly realized bhaktas. And last time I checked Lord Visnu was God.

So if that is not Who enough for you, then what can I do?

A sadhu is only a sadhu if he upholds the sastra, a guru is only a guru if he upholds the sastra, and acarya is only an acarya if he upholds the sastra. And according to Vedanta Sutra 1.1.3 Sastra yonit vat – it is only through sastra that we can get real knowledge. And Rupa Goswami tells us that that “Bhakti” which is not according the sruti, smriti etc is not Bhakti but a disturbance in society.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Oct 1, 2014 @ 10:33 am

Mahatma wrote:

I am not justifying divorce or condoning women who leave their husbands. As Prabhupada said, divorce doesn’t exist in Manu Samhita; it is a modern invention.

I just quoted 2 verses from Manu that do indicate that a man can reject a wife and take another. There are also some regarding when it is lawful for a woman to reject a husband and remarry. They are not trivial reasons.

I will not quote them but leave them for homework.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Sep 4, 2014 @ 8:04 am

Moreover, it is much more difficult for a woman to tolerate a bad husband than it is for a real man to tolerate a bad wife.

Actually “real men” don’t tolerate bad wives, they reject them — Manu gives several examples of bad wives worthy of rejecting. Here is just one such quote, there are others.

She who drinks spirituous liquor, is of bad conduct, rebellious, diseased, mischievous, or wasteful, may at any time be superseded (by another wife). A barren wife may be superseded in the eighth year, she whose children (all) die in the tenth, she who bears only daughters in the eleventh, but she who is quarrelsome without delay. Manu Smriti 9.80-81

Note that Manu tells us not to tolerate quarrelsome women (or women who are spendthrifts and have other unhealthy qualities.)

Dasaratha publicly disavowed Kaikeyi.

And, this is what Lord Visnu says about henpecked men who tolerate bad wives.

In the house where the woman acts like a man or where the man is controlled by a woman, one’s spiritual life is fruitless and the place becomes inauspicious. For one whose wife is harsh in speech and action and who loves to quarrel, the forest is more favorable than the home. Since it is easy to get water, fruits, and peace in the forest, it is considered more auspicious than being with a mean wife. Those who are puppets in the hands of their wives are never sanctified, even by cremation. A henpecked husband is not liable to receive the results of any auspicious activities that he performs. The demigods and people of earth always criticize him and he is bereft of fame and glory, so he should be considered dead, though living in the body.

(spoken by Lord Visnu in Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Prakrti-khanda 6.62-63)

» Posted By Sugriva das On Sep 4, 2014 @ 7:59 am

Thank you Devaki Mataji!

Kaunteya states

Yes; “the qualification has to be there” (which is a principle for both men and women), who could disagree on this?

Does this mean that women in the past didn’t rise to the high standards of devotional service like our ISKCON women? That women like Pishima what to speak of Kunti, Draupadi, and Devahuti were only kanisthas and not on the level of our ISKCON women and hence were not qualified to be FDG. Or, were there some other reasons that mahabhagavatas in female bodies didn’t take up the service of being a diksha guru?

» Posted By Sugriva das On Dec 2, 2013 @ 10:53 am

Some Evidence Regarding Education and Guruship for Vaishnavis

Keshava Krsna said:

Due to general male weakness, females of all ages are often abused under the guise of so-called tradition and protection. World and News statistics reveal how males are hardly living up to protection status. If this tide continues, people will start to lose faith in the male species. It is already happening.

When weakened males demand a return to, or a creation of male-dominated strictures in the face of suspicion and doubt, it is for males to prove their capabilities first. And yet we speak optimistically of a coming Golden Age.

I find your statement here to be offensive and absurd. You have generalized that all men have become weak and abuse women. Does that apply to you as well? Are you speaking about yourself? Who are you speaking about? The real fact of the matter is that as sastras tell us since time immemorial there have always been good men and bad men and that women need to be protected from bad men (and themselves) by good men.

Your words are like a mangina reading from a feminist script and that I just cannot accept. If you believe it then you are also one of those weak men so why should we listen to you. Your whole attitude contributes to an adversarial attitude between men and women as you can see by my reaction. From the way you write men are all abusive, rapist, monsters. What kind of effect does that have on women? And what kind of man would want to be associated with women who have been affected by such rhetoric?

In general I find the the members of ISKCON are several years behind the curve on these issues. In the mundane world there is already much greater awareness of the pernicious effects of feminism and there is a growing backlash to it. While the rest of the world has grown wary of the social disease called feminism we in ISKCON are more than willing to drink the “purple kool-aid.”

Also please explain to me how it is that the pernicious effects of Kali yuga are gender specific and only affects men but not women. You need to go back and read SB 12 canto about what it does to women.

This desire for so called equality is a by product of the failed Marxist doctrine of which modern feminism is definitely and on off spring and like Marxism it will self destruct and that self destruction will take many down with it. This desire for equality is a manifestation of our envy of Krsna and wanting to be equal to Him.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Jan 17, 2013 @ 6:44 am

Women Gurus In Kali Yuga?

@ Keshava Krsna Prabhu #9

You typed:

“That reference was written in early 1969. During those times, as Govinda Mataji can attest, Iskcon was still in the ‘close family’ mode. Indeed, Govinda Mataji was Srila Prabhupada’s secretary for a while. Three disciple couples were to travel to London to set Iskcon history. Can we see why Srila Prabhupada was optimistic? (Of course he always was) “By 1975…” he wanted Bhaktivedanta namesakes. Did things happen this way? No.”

Srila Prabhupada saw that many of disciples had fallen down and by 1977 he ordered that Varnashrama Dharma was to implemented and started specifically in ISKCON (Feb 14, 1997 Mayapura—Varnashrama Dharma conversation)

It should also be noted that Srila Prabhupada penned the Suniti could not be a diksha guru purport in the 4th canto in 1974, several years after that letter to Hamsadutta.

Thus his later instruction in 1974 supersedes that of 1969.

» Posted By Sugriva das On Dec 6, 2012 @ 7:35 pm

A Tale of Two Zodiacs

Dear Antardvipa Prabhu,

Hare Krsna. I wanted to thank you and also Shyamasundara Prabhu for your very nice explanation it is by far much more authoritative and convincing than that of the antagonist. After reading your explanation Vrajakishore’s text by comparison was nebulous at best, disorganized, simplistic and unscientific. I also found his comments to be of the hairsplitting variety and unable in any way to nullify your presentation. In fact they made your case even stronger.

Again I thank both you and Shyamasundara Prabhu for your efforts to enlighten us and remove the doubts created by others.

Sugriva das

» Posted By Sugriva das On Nov 9, 2012 @ 6:05 am

The 12 Signs of The Zodiac

Dear Vraja Kishore Prabhu,
In #23 you wrote:

“The book itself repeats a well known fact that Bhaktisiddhanta was not a Jataka, ever. The topic under discussion here is Jataka Jyotisha. Therefore even once we know confidently what Bhaktisiddhanta’s opinion on the definition of the zodiac starting point; still we have to take that point into careful consideration.”

It appears to me that you are implying that astronomy is dependent on astrology and not the other way around. How is that? Without astronomy there is no astrology. What am I missing here? Please clarify, you seem to be saying even if as Vedic astronomer Srila Bhaktisiddhanta favored sidereal zodiac then this would still not be sufficient for you unless he were an astrologer as well. If he was not an astrologer then it would as you say require “careful consideration.” Why?

» Posted By Sugriva das On Sep 14, 2012 @ 6:30 am

Brihaspati in the Horoscopes of Devotees

part 2

Then on the other extreme are those who come into astrology from the sciences but have no sadhana. (This is especially common in India.) They get caught up in mathematical analysis without developed intuition via spiritual practices. This type is less prevalent than the former. If they were to practice a regular sadhana of japa and other basic principles of Bhakti yoga then they have good potential for being excellent astrologers. And, while it is possible for anyone to take up the sadhana of bhakti yoga, it is not really possible for the mathematically challenged to become good mathematicians.

The conflict that you have seen in the comments in this and other jyotish related articles in the last few months has been (IMHO) between those who want jyotish to be presented as a real Vedic science with the required balance of intellectual rigor and spiritual sadhana versus the “Pop” presentation of jyotish which tarnishes the subject and makes it an object of ridicule as you and others have commented.

Akruranatha said:

I am glad to know that the devotees who are taking up this field of Vedic knowledge are doing so responsibly and thoughtfully. I really did mean what I said about encouraging you to write articles about it.

Unfortunately that is not the case for as we have seen there are the serious students who want to follow the actual tradition and the others.

I am only a student of jyotisa it would be better if someone like Shyamasundara Prabhu who has dedicated his whole life to this science would write. Much of what I have written above is from him and can be found on his site at:

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 14, 2010 @ 5:11 am

Akruranatha said:

Astrology also suffers under a stigma or reputation of being not actually scientific, full of superstition and lore to lure gullible people.

Astrology is a great science that has been degraded for various reasons. Now a days many people think that they are astrologers if they can punch the birth data into their computer program but would be lost without their computers being unable to do the basic math required to draw up a chart.

In the past to be a qualified astrologer in India required proficiency in Sanskrit, mathematics and astronomy before one could even study jyotish texts. So you can imagine that this would eliminate most people from the study because they would not be intelligent enough to master the pre-requisites. These pre-requisites would give the student a razor sharp mind and keen intellect required to deal with jyotish the hetu sastra dealing with cause and effect. Make no mistake about it jyotish is a super-science, it is a multi-disciplinary study and the most complicated of all material sciences. But because it is a super-science, such intellectual training though necessary is not sufficient. Because they were brahmanas they also studied sastra, practiced tapasya, chanted japa, meditation, yoga etc all of which are important to increase the person’s intuition making them sensitive to the message of param atma. So this combination of intellectual rigor and refined intuition resulted in master astrologers. Both sides are important if one is missing then it doesn’t work.

Unfortunately the introduction of calculation aids such as ephemerides and lately computers has drastically lowered the bar to the point that the mathematically challenged take up astrology after reading a few books. Therefore disrupting the necessary balance of rigor and logic on one side and spiritually developed intuition on the other. Their thinking is fuzzy and characterized by reliance on their so-called “psychic abilities,” lack of real depth of understanding of the subject, no intellectual rigor and a shallow approach. They are “pop” astrologers with no scientific training.


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 14, 2010 @ 5:08 am

Regarding text 54

I am sincerely interested in the philosophical issue raised by Sugriva about whether Brhaspati is like a barometer (i.e., a predictor, not a causal agent).

I got it and a lot more from a Jyotish seminar that Shyamasundara Prabhu gave in the Soho temple last year. I downloaded it from his website.

You should know that Brhaspati is only one of many synonyms for the planet Jupiter. He is also called Jiva, Angirasa, Suraguru, Mantri, Vachaspati, Arya, Suri and Vagisa. (Hora Sara chapter 2) Angirasa and Brhaspati are two different people though related to each other. Similarly Venus has multiple names such as Sukra, Bhrigu, Asphujit, Sita, Usana, and Kavi. Again Brghu and Sukra are not the same person.

In Sanskrit all the planets have multiple names. So simply taking the name Brihaspati and identifying the planet as the person will get you in trouble. Rather Jupiter’s qualities would best be described to be like Brhaspati when Jupiter is manifesting his best qualities. In other words the planet is named according to articles that share similar symptoms. Also every planet has a huge portfolio of things that it represents in the case of Jupiter it represents Brhaspati and persons like him, as well as people of great knowledge (Vachaspati), power of speech (Vagisa), sattva guna, and wise minister (Mantri). He also represents the liver, and fat in the human body. So it is not that Jupiter is fat or your liver or even the deva guru Brhaspati, but rather he represents such things. One should not be confused in thinking that because one of many synonyms for the planet is Brhaspati that he is actually the person Brhaspati, by that reasoning he would also be Angirasa who is a different person altogether. There is a personality ruling the planet Jupiter who is described in sastra and you will often see pictures of him along with the other navagrahas but as far as I know that person is not Brhaspati or Angirasa.

The actual person controlling Jupiter/Brhaspati/Guru/Angirasa is Vamanadeva and He is supremely independent.

I hope this helps.

As for your other comments I have been traveling and don’t always have time for such things.


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 10, 2010 @ 9:21 pm

Patita Pavana said:

When I met BV Raman in his office in the seventies, we discussed Prabhupada’s horoscope as Dhanush lagna. After that his journal printed articles to this effect, even while his daughter Smt Gayatri Vasudeva was the Editor. Dhanush lagna is accepted by every great (in my opinion) astrologer of India including my own teacher Shri Pandit Vijai Ranamukhadevaji who proved this point to me in 1973-4 From my point of view, there is very little room for debate on this issue.

I asked for proof that BV Raman made these statements, this is not proof. If he indeed published such articles then cite them. BV. Raman also published Lord Caitanya’s chart in Notable Horoscopes in chapter 14 with a Libra lagna not Simha lagna as is found in the Caitanya Caritamrta and universally accepted in the Gaudiya world including even by yourself. How will you reconcile this conundrum? That the person you claim says Prabhupada had a Dhanus lagna also wrongly claims that Mahaprabhu has a Tula lagna. This is a point that K.N. also mentioned when he did Mahaprabhu’s chart that BV Raman got it wrong. There was never any mention by KN Rao regarding BV Raman’s reading of Prabhupada’s chart, if BV Raman had made any comment on Prabhupada’s chart then K.N. Rao would have mentioned it as he was a long time contributor to BV Raman’s magazine.

I see that you have closed your mind on this subject and no matter that even Srila Prabhupada himself directly said, and it is recorded for posterity, that the Makara lagna chart prepared by Ojha was accurate whereas those with Dhanur were not has no effect on you. So if you will not even accept the words of Srila Prabhupada then you are truly impervious to light, a card carrying example of scissor’s philosophy.

You may think I have something against you. I do not. I am just interested in the subject being properly presented then the community of devotees will be benefited.


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 12:17 pm

Patita Pavana said:

Discussions regarding the horoscopes of living ISKCON sannyasis in public is a violation of all Vaishnava ethics and etiquette.. In my opinion, His Holiness Indradyumna Maharaja”

This is a cop out. First of all I do not know Maharaja’s horoscope, what to speak of discussing it, but I do happen to know his year of birth and know that Jupiter was debilitated at that time and remained so for about a year. I was commenting on your (or who ever wrote that article) overly simplistic presentation of a very complex subject. And how you run away for difficult questions by citing etiquette, as was the case with comment #1 when in actuality you do not have an answer to the question. As if Jupiter is the only planet capable of showing spiritual life in a person’s chart. By your one-dimensional understanding every year when Jupiter is debilitated we would expect that demons are born and no devotees. Yet we find many powerful devotees born during those times. And every year when Jupiter is exalted in Cancer we would expect to find many devotees as 25% of the population will have Brihapati either in the 1st, 3rd, 5th or 9th but this is not the case. Because we also find religious hypocrites born when Guru is in his own sign or otherwise seemingly powerful according to your article. So there is a lot more at work than simply Brhaspati. That is why I said your presentation of the subject focusing only on Jupiter as all good, never problematic, and emblematic of Bhakti — is one dimensional and I stand by that. It is the equivalent of Sun sign astrology except that instead of the Sun you substituted Jupiter. Einstein once said “that if you really know a subject then you can explain it even to a child.” Considering that you could not explain the factors identifying the spiritual dimension in a person’s chart to adults what to speak of children then…


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 12:13 pm

Part 2

And Parasara Muni pointed out the direct connection between the Avataras and Their manifestation as Grahas-planets. So if anyone is to be appeased it is the Avatara Who manifests as that planet. Thus to appease Vamadeva Who appears as Jupiter it would be very beneficial to chant Hare Krsna, but not to Brhaspati. Mataji never made any of these distinctions but continued with the misunderstanding that a planet needs to be appeased. All in all I found their writings tinged with Hindu misconceptions at variance with Vaisnava Siddhanta, this combined with a pedestrian understanding of Vedic Astrology. I hope I have clarified your misunderstanding.


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 12:06 pm

Akruranatha said:

I did not notice any recommendation to worship demigods, and in fact when Suresh Prabhu mentioned some accepted ways to “appease” Brhaspati, Abhaya Mudra Mataji recommended chanting Hare Krishna as the best way. This seems like good advice, as we all know that by pleasing Krishna all the demigods are automatically pleased.

She continued the idea of the need to appease the planet Brhaspati. There is absolutely no need to appease him or any other planet. To think so is demi-god worship. In India there are many temples dedicated to various planets especially Sani (Saturn). In almost every non-Vaisnava temple you will find small sanctuaries for worshipping the “nava-grahas” nine planets. People worship them to appease them in an attempt to become free from their difficulties. This is demigod worship.

So she was definitely wrong to suggest that chanting Hare Krsna can appease Brhaspati. Of course chanting the Holy Name is all-auspicious but the point I am driving at is that Vaisnavas do not try to appease any planet. This concept of appeasing planets and other such non-Vaisnava practices has been introduced into ISKCON mostly by devotees who spent some time in India studied a little astrology and became Hinduized meaning apasiddhanta. Hindu astrologers wrongly recommend appeasing different planets. Everything we do must be consistent with Vaisnava Siddhanta. If we properly understand the subject then we understand that the planets do not cause anything to happen and do not need to be appeased in any way shape or form. I used the example of a barometer, you do not appease the barometer by chanting Hare Krsna to it despite the fact that chanting is good, because the barometer doesn’t cause rain to fall. Vaisnava Acaryas like Gopala Bhatta Gosvami have given proper guidelines of what to do if we have problems. Instead of worshipping the navagrahas he tells us that the sastras say we should worship the Navayogendras, instead of worshipping Ganesha like many Hinduized ISKCON astrologers recommend Gopala Bhatta gives sastra to show we should instead worship Visvaksena, etc.

Continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 12:04 pm

Part 2

In actual fact Akruranatha you know nothing about Vedic astrology. You are not alone in this regard the same goes for 99.9% of ISKCON members. You do not, for example, know anything about the nature and difference between natural, functional and temporal benefic/malefic planets. Yet you attack a whistle blower like me. Why? Because, according to you own statements

I thought it was a wonderful article with many nice quotes from Srila Prabhupada’s books.

Now I want to make it very clear that I do not think that Patita Uddharana (Pavana) Prabhu has any criminal motivation to cheat anyone. So please don’t misquote me. In fact I do not know the motivations for he and his wife writing all these articles about Jyotish. Maybe they have nothing else to do, maybe he wants to preach this way or maybe, as others have suggested it is a marketing strategy – I have absolutely no problem with that let them, who can stop them. I don’t read charts for a living so I am not after clients or competing. Or, he may have some other reason or a mixture of reasons and we can give him the benefit of the doubt that it is all done with the best of intentions. However, because he means no harm does not mean he does no harm.

My simple point remains (and one made by several other commentators on their other texts) is that after you remove all the nice quotes from Srila Prabhupada what is left is a very lame and pallid mis-representation of Vedic astrology. Laymen who are ignorant may appreciate it but those who have actually studied the subject in detail do not. That is why I requested the editors of Dandavats to have articles on Jyotish (or any other arcane subject) vetted by known experts for the protection of the lay readership.


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 12:01 pm

Response to text #20

Akuranathaji said:

Wow, Sugriva is getting so heavy here.

I thought it was a wonderful article with many nice quotes from Srila Prabhupada’s books.

The quotes are not the problem with the article it is what comes after that is the problem. I guess devotees are in many ways innocent, despite many scandals in ISKCON over the years and some gross cheating. Most devotees are pure at heart and thus full of trust, accepting sometimes to the extreme of naïve credulity. To be trusting and full of faith is a good quality that is unfortunately taken advantage of by others who can easily cheat devotees who know the weakness.

Suppose I wrote an article with profuse quotations from sastra about Ayurveda, Dhanvantari, how Srila Prabhupada consulted Ayurvedic doctors, etc knowing that devotees will automatically accept them. Then after all those quotations even though I was not a qualified Ayurvedic doctor, but had just read a few books on the subject, I injected my own slant on ayurveda and invited readers to consult me for their health problems. Since most devotees are not experts in ayurveda they would not know if I was right or wrong and would be willing to accept my statements because of the momentum generated in accepting what came before— so many nice quotes from Srila Prabhupada’s books.

But, someone who is actually trained in Ayurveda and not a layman, could immediately detect that something was fishy. And, if they had a public service attitude and were not cynical they would loudly protest that it was not right. However some one like you who knows nothing of Ayurveda would protect the quack because he was a genteel quack and had quoted so much from Prabhupada’s books and was not heavy like the ayurvedic doctor (who actually knew the subject.)

So now we all know the formula of how to cheat devotees who are not expert in a particular field. First quote profusely from Prabhupada’s books on the subject (Vastu, Astrology, Ayurveda, palmistry, mantra sastra, exorcism, agama, etc) then give your own spiel. Because you have quoted from Prabhupada’s books at the beginning this means in the eyes of the ignorant layman that you are an expert even though you are not. And, as an added plus, all your ignorant victims will protect you from those who actually know the subject.

continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 4, 2010 @ 11:57 am

Part 6

In volume 3 of the recently published “Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Vaibhava” written by HH Bhakti Vikasa Swami there is a very detailed reading of Bhakti Siddhanta’s horoscope from page 187 -213 by Shyamasundara Dasa giving Bhakti Siddhanta about 24 degrees of Gemini rising. There is no way that you can change his birth time to suit your fancy because as stated he was himself an astrologer and gave the details of his birth data accurately. Not only did BST have Guru in the 4th but he had four planets in the 8th. Again like the analysis he did for Srila Prabhupada’s transcendental hosorscope Shyamasundara’s reading of BST’s chart is very enlightening and inspiring.

To sum up anyone can cull quotes from VedaBase about Brhaspati or Sukracarya or anything other subject. But to turn it into a meaningful discussion is another thing. Innocent devotees who have no depth of knowledge in Jyotish may be swayed but as the first commentator pointed out you came up very short in your presentation.

I would like to request the editors of Dandavatas to please have these types of articles about Jyotish vetted by actual experts in the subject before publishing them before the innocent public.



» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:43 pm

part 5

This whole idea of appeasing planets is the last word in foolishness as I will now demonstrate. Rainfall is often very closely associated with the sudden fall in air pressure, thus one can predict rainfall but knowing which way the air pressure is moving up or down. To measure air pressure you can build an instrument called a barometer. When the barometer goes up the air pressure goes up and when it goes down it goes down. So when the barometer is down indicating low air pressure it is sure indication that it will soon rain. However, by your logic it is the barometer that causes it to rain or not rain, and if there is a draught we should then appease the barometer to insure good rains. Similarly the planets are not causal agents but only indicators of divine plans. They have got divinatory significance by the will of God but are not independent agents in themselves that need to be appeased. As was pointed in a different comment Parasara Muni has stated in the 2nd chapter of his Brhata Parasara Hora Sastra that each planet is a manifestation of a different avatara of Krsna. Jupiter is a manifestation of Sri Vamanadeva. Thus if you have problems indicated by Jupiter then appeasement of Vamanadeva is in order, Vamanadeva is the prime mover, not Brhaspati. So first you should learn the philosophy of divination before you try to write about jyotish.

You also said:

“Therefore the position of Jupiter in His chart is significant. In the known charts of the later Gaudiya acharyas, Shrila Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Shrila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, Jupiter is also positioned in the 1st and 3rd house respectively casting aspect to the 9th house.”

This is wrong at least about Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. He didn’t have a Cancer rising but a Gemini rising sign with Guru in the 4th aspecting the 8th and 12th and not the 3rd as you have stated. And unlike Srila Prabhupada, Sarasvati Thakura was himself an accomplished astrologer and knew his birth time and there is no way of getting a Cancer rising if you calculate his chart according to the time and place of his birth.

continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

Part 4

You then said:

“Further, from B.V. Raman, who accepted the Sagittarius rising sign and later published articles dealing with the issue in his Astrological Magazine”

Dr. Raman passed away in 1998 and can’t be called as a witness so please provide some proof for this allegation. Furthermore, the present most famous and respected astrologer in India, K.N. Rao of Delhi, who has written some 20+ books on jyotish and publishes the bi-month “Journal of Astrology” and who runs the worlds biggest astrology school in Delhi with over 1500 students wrote a book “Learn Successful Predictive Techniques of Hindu Astrology” and in the 8th chapter from pages 148-174 he dedicates to Srila Prabhupada’s horoscope and declares it to be Makara lagna fiercely deprecating those who favor Dhanus lagna.

Further more in the link provided by Mother Tungavidya dd we got access to the masterful analysis by Shyamasundara Prabhu of Srila Prabhupada’s transcendental chart, which is significantly more convincing and multifaceted than yours. He clearly demonstrates in no uncertain terms that Srila Prabhupada had a Makaraka lagna with Guru in the 8th not the 9th. While all you do is try to skirt the difficult questions by saying that you were just trying to glorify Brihaspati. Well if that was the case you should have just stuck to that and left astrology, which is a difficult subject, alone.

Then you say: “So the one sure way to appease Brihaspati”

Why should we appease Brihaspati? He doesn’t do anything. The planet Jupiter is a lakshana, a symptom of what the higher laws are indicating but he doesn’t cause anything. So there is no need to appease him or any other planet or demi-god. In fact Gopala Bhatta Gosvami in Sat-kriya sara dipika quoted many sastras decrying that anyone initiated into Visnu mantra should never worship any devata or planet.

continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:38 pm

Part 3

Jupiter could be in his nica sthan but have good shadbalas, be in his uca amsa, have nicabhanga yoga etc. Whereas we have seen charts of fallen gurus and pedophiles with Jupiter in Pisces in the 9th. Your one dimensional approach to astrology creates more confusion than illumination.

You state:

“The article I have written here is not dealing in particular with the rising sign of Srila Prabhupada.”

Well by stating that Srila Prabhupada had Guru in the 9th house that certainly forces him to have a particular rising sign, one that could only be Dhanus, which contradicts your statement.

Then you state:

“The 12th lord is in the 6th, 8th or 12th house (Phala Deepika of Mantreshvara 6.69). This makes the person virtuous and contented. The person will be equipped with good behavior towards others, will enjoy happiness, will be independent, following a respectable profession or conduct, and will be known for good qualities.

This yoga is very common. I have this yoga in my chart. Does that make me equal to Srila Prabhupada?”

Really how common is it? What percentage of people have it? It also just happens that that description perfectly fits Srila Prabhupada, all good qualities. And it is more than one yoga that must be taken into account not your typical one dimensional analysis of things. In Srila Prabhupada’s chart with Makara lagna all functional benefics (Sani, Mars, Venus, and Mercury) are in benefic houses, and all functional malefics (Guru and Sun) are in malefic houses. Which is perfect. But with a Dhanus lagna we get the opposite 5th lord of purva punya in the 6th of enemies, 6th lord of enemies in the house of character etc.

Also, in Srila Prabhupada’s case it was not just 12th lord in the 8th but also 8th lord in the 8th conjunct with Ketu, this is a highly potent and spiritual combination. You ignore that and try to compare it to yourself. Do you also have Makara lagna with Sun, Jupiter and Ketu in the 8th, Moon and Mars in the 5th, Saturn uca in the 10th and Mercury and Venus in the 9th? No you don’t so you will not have the same effect. “One swallow doesn’t make a spring.”

continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:34 pm

Part 2

During Srila Prabhupada’s Guru bhukti from age 23-39, he had great difficulties, sudden ups and downs, loss of money, position and business collapses, etc because he had 12th lord in the 8th with the 8th lord and Ketu. This serious struggle led to his spiritual introspection and fortunate meeting with his Guru Maharaja as they (Sun, Jupiter and Ketu) were in a stellium associated with mokshasthanas and spiritual life. Now had he had Dhanus lagna and thus Guru as lord of 1st and 4th in the 9th with the 9th lord and Ketu (who according to Parasara is not a malefic in such a circumstance because when conjoined a lord of a quadrant and trine in a trine or quadrant becomes a catalyst pushing one to greater heights) then during his Jupiter period he should have had a succession of victories and successes but just the opposite happened. By the time his Guru period was over he had lost his father (odd and hard to explain if Guru is in 9th with 9th lord), several costly moves and changes of residence, had great debts many enemies, lost his position with Dr Bose and the Smith Institute etc, basically losing all his previous gains. He had sudden gains and even more sudden loses this along with his great spiritual pursuits is perfectly consistent with Guru in the 8th. But certainly not with Guru in the 9th with the 9th lord. You see the difficulty with astrology is that at some point theory has to fit with reality or else it is of no use. You simply can not explain such testing times for Guru mahadasa if Guru is in his best placement of the 9th as you claim it to be. For if this is the result of Guru in the 9th in his best placement as you claim what then when Guru is not so well positioned.

When somebody questions you like the first commentator who pointed out most devotees born in 1949, (and multiple of 12 years) will have Jupiter in debilitated in Makara yet many are great devotees like Indrayumna Svami, JPS, etc., you quickly try to change the topic into saying you are glorifying Brhaspati and not discussing astrology. Well that is not what I see when I read your article, there is plenty of jyotish in it with your own opinions. Jyotish is significantly more complicated than your one dimensional articles portray.

continued …

» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:28 pm

Dear Patita Pavana Prabhu,

Surely your wife didn’t write this article as it has your style all over it. Aside from that English is not her first language,. This is again a simplistic article. While it is great to cull verses from sastra using Vedabase it is another to have a proper understanding of astrology.

In fact Jupiter is not beneficial for everybody because Jupiter like every other planet can give a whole spectrum of results depending on his position and lordship.

For anyone with Taurus, Libra or Capricorn rising Jupiter is potentially the worst planet because he rules 8th, 6th and 12th respectively making him a functional malefic. To have Jupiter in the 9th or 5th from one of those lagnas would be quite negative warping their philosophical views under a spiritual guise. And for Gemini and Virgo he will rule the 7th making him a first class Maraka – death inflicting planet or creator of obstacles at best. For Cancer while he rules the 9th he also rules the 6th and similarly for Leo while he rules the 5th he also rules the 8th and for Aires while he rules the 9th he also rules the 12th thus his good gets neutralized to what extent will depend on other factors.

For Aquarius Jupiter rules 2 and 11 making him a functional benefic the best for material gains but when his period comes he will be a maraka as both houses are negative during their period.

For Capricorn, Aquarius and Virgo, Venus is the best benefic for spiritual life, not Jupiter, as he is the raja yoga karaka. And for Taurus and Libra the best planet is Saturn, and for Taurus Mercury is also very good. But not Jupiter.

You paint the fanciful picture that Jupiter is always beneficial for devotees which is simply not a fact. That is why many devotees become disenchanted with shallow astrologers. I don’t know how many times I have heard devotees tell me “I have been waiting for my Jupiter period to come since so many astrologers told me it would be good but now since it has been here it has been rather lackluster and even negative.”


» Posted By Sugriva das On Apr 1, 2010 @ 7:23 pm

The debate over Srila Prabhupada’s rising sign

part 2

I have even gone to the extend to present both views of the matter.

From what I have read they also put both sides of the matter forward not just one side. But it seems that no one agreed with you so you take it as a personal attack.

You think you have permanently established your position in this world claiming that Srila Prabhupada is a advocate of moksha having strong 8th house,

Mataji no one said that Prabhupada was an advocate of moksha like mayavadis. It is just that the twelve houses are divided according to the four purusarthas dharma, artha, kama and moksha. So mokshasthana in this case has to do with spirituality in general and in the case of Prabhupada with Bhakti. Mina is the 12th sign of the zodiac, it is a “moksha sign” and since Venus is exalted there it shows that the highest manifestation of love (venus) is love of Krsna – Bhakti. So for you to say this regarding “moksa” is to put words in other people’s mouths.

but time is on my side. Time is on the side of the new generation to build a foundation for the correct understanding. I represent the new generation which not necessarily agrees with all of the points of the old generation.

When I read this I was both disturbed and amused. Disturbed because Krsna conscious culture teaches us to respect our seniors and not be defiant as your shrill statement above reads. It sounds like some sort of revolutionary battle cry “down with the old, up with the new”, “challenge authority” and other such slogans.

And, I was also amused because you claim to be the “New Generation” of astrologer yet in #19 you tell us you have been an astrologer for 20 years.

I am an astrologer, now for twenty years

That doesn’t exactly sound like new to me. Whereas we find that students of astrology such a GGdas (#5, 8 and 9), Vraja Kishor (#6), and Yadushrestha Prabhu (#14-15) do represent the New Generation and they do not support your views. So it has nothing to do with old or new generation of astrologer as you put it.

The rest of what you say after this doesn’t make sense to me. What is it that you are trying to say?


» Posted By Sugriva das On Jan 20, 2010 @ 6:24 pm

 Page 1 of 2  1  2  » 
«« Back To Stats Page