Follow by Email

Monday, July 07, 2008

Aniṣṭakārī jīva

Bhakta: "How you deal with rats, mice, cockroach? You kill them?"

Advaitadas: "Cockroaches and mosquitos; snakes and scorpions too - modeta sādhur api vṛścika sarpa hatyā - this is a verse from the 7th Canto by Prahlāda Mahāśaya; it means that even the sādhus rejoice at the killing of a snake or a scorpion. I had cockroaches in my flat 10 years ago, they took over the whole deity kitchen - what else could I do, to preserve the arcana? There were hundreds of them and counting.”

Bhakta: “You never had rats or mice?”

Advaitadas: “I had rats in Sudevī's house in Rādhākund. I just locked them out with iron plates boarded on the door. You don’t kill rats because they die in a lonely place and stink terribly; sometimes you can't find the corpses.”

Bhakta: “Yes, but there's too in Bhāgavatam a verse that says one shouldn`t kill them....”

Advaitadas: “Rats? I don’t remember that.”

Bhakta: “I don`t remember rats but mosquitoes and others..”

Advaitadas: “No no, such a verse is not there - Sādhu Bābā specifically allowed us to kill aniṣṭakārī jīva, and I already quoted the confirmation from the 7th canto, modeta sādhur api” (SB 7.9.14)

Bhakta: “aniṣṭakārī jīva?”

Advaitadas: "That means ‘harmful creatures’. Rather, the śāstra says that the snake is so envious that feeding it milk will only increase its poison. Anyway, let me explain the logic of killing mosquitos: they are killers because they carry killer diseases, malaria and dengue fever. If someone assaults you with a syringe with AIDS will you knock him down or allow him to poison you with the injection? Surely you will strike him down - it is the same thing. This is not compassion - it is foolishness. That's why Sādhu Bābā spoke of aniṣṭakārī jīva. Not that you go out and kill millions of sweet cows and so.”

Chat June 9, 2008

28 comments:

  1. Would you say that the same applies to mosquitos and so on in the Dham? I notice that most of the sadhus hesitate to swat mosquitos, but have no qualms about plugging in a bottle of All-Out and killing them with that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am sorry, I have no idea what is All out, and in 12 years in the dham I have also never seen any sadhu spraying insects really. Anyway I have already quoted the Bhagavata's modeta sadhur api vrscika sarpa hatya on it - even the sadhus rejoice....
    And regarding the holy Dham, a snake is a snake and a mosquito a mosquito. If the Dham would be an exception then with that logic the cops could not arrest the Gundas there either etc. etc. It would be eldorado for outlaws and all other harmful creatures.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cockroaches are not harmful.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Quote, blog:

    I had cockroaches in my flat 10 years ago, they took over the whole deity kitchen - what else could i do, to preserve the arcana? There were hundreds of them and counting.”

    Would you have them crawl first all over your deities' plates, then over the deities Themselves, then over your food, then all over you and your children when they are sleeping? You think they will just leave when you politely ask them to?

    Anyway, the extermination did not have to be done by me - the housing corporation organized it on their own initiative for the entire apartment block, 700 flats were totally infested. So my hands remained clean.

    ReplyDelete
  5. In this context my Gurubhai Niranjan Prasad Das once quoted AtmAnaM satataM rakSet to me, which means 'always protect yourself'. Google gave no link to that text - it may exist but not
    online, but I found a similar text in the Kularnava tantra, First Ullasa:

    tataz cApyuttamaM janma
    labdhvA cendriya sauSThavam |
    na vettyAtma-hitaM yas tu
    sa bhavet Atma-ghAtakaH || 17 ||
    vinA dehena kasyApi
    puruSArtho na vidyate |
    tasmAd deha dhanaM prApya
    puNya karmANi sAdhayet || 18 ||
    rakSet sarvAtmanAtmAnam
    AtmA sarvasya bhAjanam |
    rakSaNe yatnam AtiSThet
    yAvat tattvaM na pazyati || 19 ||


    Shiva told Parvati: "Now that you have attained this topmost human birth with its refined senses, if you do not know the ultimate good, you are committing suicide. Without a material body you cannot
    attain the goal of life, therefore maintain this treasure of the human body and perform auspicious acts. Protect yourself well, because the Self is the reservoir of everything. Protect yourself carefully as long as you have not seen the Absolute Truth."

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://vedabase.net/sb/5/26/17/en

    yas tv iha vai bhūtānām īśvaropakalpita-vṛttīnām avivikta-para-vyathānāḿ svayaḿ puruṣopakalpita-vṛttir vivikta-para-vyatho vyathām ācarati sa paratrāndhakūpe tad-abhidroheṇa nipatati tatra hāsau tair jantubhiḥ paśu-mṛga-pakṣi-sarīsṛpair maśaka-yūkā-matkuṇa-makṣikādibhir ye ke cābhidrugdhās taiḥ sarvato 'bhidruhyamāṇas tamasi vihata-nidrā-nirvṛtir alabdhāvasthānaḥ parikrāmati yathā kuśarīre jīvaḥ ||

    Bhaktivedanta's translation:

    "By the arrangement of the Supreme Lord, low-grade living beings like bugs and mosquitoes suck the blood of human beings and other animals. Such insignificant creatures are unaware that their bites are painful to the human being. However, first-class human beings — brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas and vaiśyas — are developed in consciousness, and therefore they know how painful it is to be killed. A human being endowed with knowledge certainly commits sin if he kills or torments insignificant creatures, who have no discrimination. The Supreme Lord punishes such a man by putting him into the hell known as Andhakūpa, where he is attacked by all the birds and beasts, reptiles, mosquitoes, lice, worms, flies, and any other creatures he tormented during his life. They attack him from all sides, robbing him of the pleasure of sleep. Unable to rest, he constantly wanders about in the darkness. Thus in Andhakūpa his suffering is just like that of a creature in the lower species."

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ananda,
    1. I think I have presented a large amount of common sense (yukti), regarding the danger the anistakari jivas pose (read the blog once more).
    2. I have also quoted shastra, the same Bhagavata, the 7th canto (7.9.14) modeta sadhur api vrscika sarpa hatya, that even the sadhus rejoice at the killing of a snake, scorpion etc.
    3. The verse you quoted speaks of abhidrohena, a feeling of malice - ISKCON even has a pic attached to the verse of a sadistic kid tearing apart an insect. Self defence, however, is neither malice nor sadism. It is a basic human right and instinct.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I seem to be squashing them all the time, though Kathmandu is gracefully low on mosquitoes. I haven't attempted to justify it as righteous or any such, but I find the evil involved in killing them less than the distraction and health risks, both with disturbed sleep and possible diseases.


    1. Yes, the yukti is there all right, and you quote the shastra too. Still, we need to address the 5th canto verse instead of brushing it off, or doing a simplistic "outweighed" twist.


    2. Vrischika-sarpa-hatya: Please do remember that these two are far more lethal than mosquitos, what to speak of cockroaches. They are also portrayed as fundamentally envious creatures, unlike the avivikta para-vyathis of BhP. 5.26.17.

    What about flies and other insects? What about cats dogs on the streets -- they carry a host of diseases -- would a sadhu find joy in seeing them killed, owing to their lethal potential?

    And what about pre-emptive strikes to Middle-Eastern countries? They are all filed under the same "permission" in the end.


    3. "The verse you quoted speaks of abhidrohena, a feeling of malice..."

    I dare say that most people squashing irritating insects do it with a flare of frustration or vengeance, which really are just the passive and the active side of the same anger.

    I would also like to note that the "ignorantly hurting others" is described as puruṣopakalpita-vṛtti, or god-determined means of sustenance.

    vivikta-para-vyatho vyathām ācarati sa paratrāndhakūpe... - "The knower of pain in others, who still causes pain to others, heads to the Andhakupa-hell in the afterlife..."

    Well, fortunately the agony of Andhakupa is proportionate to the adhidroha with which the insects are killed. A mere few detached and mechanical splats will probably get you a decent ride 'cross the dark pit with relatively few and primarily non-aggressive bites.


    "Self defence, however, is neither malice nor sadism. It is a basic human right and instinct."

    Self-defense, however, must be appropriate to the threat posed. Otherwise even self-defense is criminal. I believe it's called "exaggeration of emergency defense". The immediacy of the situation and the level of threat are assessed to determine whether the level of defense was appropriated or excessive, and how far the defendant could realistically have expected to accurately assess the situation.

    Here the level of threat is wholly uncertain. I've spent six years in India, caring little for mosquito bites, and have never contracted malaria. Only certain mosquitoes carry malaria, for example, and heck, it's only the females that bite! Every male mosquito you kill, then, is fundamentally innocent, and the fatality is attributed to your lack of ability to distinguish one from the other.

    It's a bit like walking through a ghetto and shooting away every mean looking gangsta who just might stab you if he gets a chance. Of course homicide and insecticide are two different realms, but the analogy should give us all food for thought over the "righteous principle" we embrace.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I seem to be squashing them all the time, though Kathmandu is gracefully low on mosquitoes. I haven't attempted to justify it as righteous or any such, but I find the evil involved in killing them less than the distraction and health risks, both with disturbed sleep and possible diseases.

    Later you will contradict this by saying only the females bite.
    Can you tell when you squash one?

    1. Yes, the yukti is there all right, and you quote the shastra too. Still, we need to address the 5th canto verse instead of brushing it off, or doing a simplistic "outweighed" twist.

    I have given it a balanced thought. A bit ironic, if I may say, since you, in June 2004 at GD, had a long list of reservations about exactly this section of the Bhagavata. Now you left Hinduism you take its scriptures more seriously then when you were one. That is amusing.

    2. Vrischika-sarpa-hatya: Please do remember that these two are far more lethal than mosquitos, what to speak of cockroaches.

    In the days when you were still worshipping statues, would you have the cockroaches take over your kitchen? Would you allow them even now? Do you acknowledge that they won't just leave on request?

    What about flies and other insects? What about cats dogs on the streets -- they carry a host of diseases -- would a sadhu find joy in seeing them killed, owing to their lethal potential?

    That is a silly argument. Mosquitos are aggressive biters, unlike cats and dogs. Having said that, I was bitten twice by a rabies-dog while going on madhukari in 1983, and I hurried to the hospital to get the necessary shots. Pitbulls get shot in Holland (of all places, with all its pet-o-philia) if they are dangerous too. But anyway, apart from that, this is an absurd argument and I didnt propose killing dogs in the blog at all.

    And what about pre-emptive strikes to Middle-Eastern countries? They are all filed under the same "permission" in the end.

    Here is the crux of the issue - I never said that one should go around with a spraying bottle and spray one square mile of territory around oneself as a pre-emptive strike. We believe one should bend over backward in tolerance but when one's life is under threat one should strike in defence.

    3. "The verse you quoted speaks of abhidrohena, a feeling of malice..."
    I dare say that most people squashing irritating insects do it with a flare of frustration or vengeance, which really are just the passive and the active side of the same anger.


    God sits in everyone's heart and knows our attitude. If it leads me to Andhakupa I know I have done it wrong. Sincerity lies at the base of everything.

    I would also like to note that the "ignorantly hurting others" is described as puruṣopakalpita-vṛtti, or god-determined means of sustenance.

    That also counts for snakes and scorpions and you agree with shastra that it is OK to kill them.

    vivikta-para-vyatho vyathām ācarati sa paratrāndhakūpe... - "The knower of pain in others, who still causes pain to others, heads to the Andhakupa-hell in the afterlife..."
    Well, fortunately the agony of Andhakupa is proportionate to the adhidroha with which the insects are killed.


    That is exactly what I am saying.

    A mere few detached and mechanical splats will probably get you a decent ride 'cross the dark pit with relatively few and primarily non-aggressive bites.

    Not only that, most devotees forget that 5.26 is a prelude to 6.1 which speaks about salvation from hell by harinama. As long as we dont kill creatures deliberately, thinking the sin will be wiped out by harinama (namno balAd pApa buddhih...)

    "Self defence, however, is neither malice nor sadism. It is a basic human right and instinct."
    Self-defense, however, must be appropriate to the threat posed. Otherwise even self-defense is criminal. I believe it's called "exaggeration of emergency defense". The immediacy of the situation and the level of threat are assessed to determine whether the level of defense was appropriated or excessive, and how far the defendant could realistically have expected to accurately assess the situation.


    I have already addressed that point - God is in the heart and he sees whether our actions are excessive or not. I dont chase mosquitos around the room aggressively, trying pre-emptive strikes, I have better things to do, but if one lands on my skin then POW!.

    Here the level of threat is wholly uncertain. I've spent six years in India, caring little for mosquito bites, and have never contracted malaria. Only certain mosquitoes carry malaria, for example, and heck, it's only the females that bite! Every male mosquito you kill, then, is fundamentally innocent, and the fatality is attributed to your lack of ability to distinguish one from the other.

    As I said before, how can you tell which species is landing on your skin and what the gender is?

    It's a bit like walking through a ghetto and shooting away every mean looking gangsta who just might stab you if he gets a chance. Of course homicide and insecticide are two different realms, but the analogy should give us all food for thought over the "righteous principle" we embrace.

    Here too, you have already refuted yourself for me - a gangsta aint no mosquito and why should a Vaishnava enter the ghetto anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've spent six years in India, caring little for mosquito bites, and have never contracted malaria.

    I think you have been there for less than 2 years really. I have had malaria 5 times and I would not wish such agony even to my worst enemy - ask anyone who had it: they will fully agree with me, knowing what anistakari jivas they are.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm not defending any particular position, Advaita -- hence my clear admission in the beginning and a note on lesser of two evils. The Buddhist tradition would take a much sterner look at this.

    Nothing is about any single issue. Everything is about principles, and the flexibility of their application is something that always deserves careful contemplation.

    Here the issue is not one of "mosquitos or not", it's about the general principle of reacting to a suspected threat in a manner harmful to the assumed threat.

    I do have reservations over every single scripture there is, much more so than I had in 2004, whether Hindu or Buddhist. The statements don't in and of themselves have any bearing on me, not in any authoritarian sense anyway, yet their content deserves a careful look.

    In your case, subscribe as you do to the Bhagavata as an infallible authority, you have the burden of reconciling statements like 5.26.17. It was with this curiosity, seeing how you reconcile it, that I posted my initial comment.

    You say you've given 5.26.17 "a balanced thought". Could you please elaborate on this? Does "a balanced thought" mean you consider the statement outweighed by 7.9.16? One against one, and the scope of the second one's license a bit sketchy, I don't think skipping the verse is justified -- especially since 5.26.17 specifically names sarīsṛpaiḥ — snakes; maśaka — mosquitoes; yūkā — lice; matkuṇa — worms; makṣika-ādibhiḥ — flies and so on...

    I would like to see more in the way of clearly reconciling these two statements from the Bhagavata. It's a bit sketchy as it stands.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "I think you have been there for less than 2 years really."

    A total of five-six years since 1996. Enough exposure to mosquitoes at any rate, quite sufficient in fact...

    ReplyDelete
  13. In your case, subscribe as you do to the Bhagavata as an infallible authority, you have the burden of reconciling statements like 5.26.17. It was with this curiosity, seeing how you reconcile it, that I posted my initial comment.

    Reconciliation is very easy really, Ananda. The Guru has the final say. It is a factor which you have often disregarded in the past, which is, at least in my opinion, why you could not last in Hinduism. The Guru has given us the go-ahead for reasonable and fair self defence. Also you disregard the yukti factor, as you cannot offer a realistic solution to the cockroach vs the deities-problem. Finally, I think that if you had had malaria yourself you would talk otherwise. You are lucky in a sense, but it keeps you handicapped in practical judgement. And, as I said in the blog, if someone comes up to you with an AIDS syringe, will you hug him and say 'Peace brother, welcome'?

    As for shastra being infallible authority, if you have studied my blog with some care in the last 30 months you will see that I did adjust my vision on that considerably. Here too, as with killing harmful creatures, it is one's sincerity that counts and nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Referring to the view of the guru-authority is no doubt is an easy way to claim for reconciliation, but it is only good for yourself unless the conciliatory logic that addresses both verses can be detailed. Moreover, the view of your guru, my guru or Mr. Anderson's guru?

    Cockroaches can be easily carried out the house and thrown far away, just as mice and rats can. A sufficient level of hygiene and tight containers, along with the occasional carrying out of a cockroach, is a fine solution for me. I don't really need to kill the cockroach, so why should I.

    Someone coming with an AIDS syringe isn't exactly the same as being face to face with a mosquito!!

    The story of Mrigari the hunter not stepping on ants, and Jada Bharata likewise rocking the palanquin, are good case examples of nonviolent consideration vis-a-vis insects. And ants, if anyone, wreck havoc in the kitchen!

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Moreover, the view of your guru, my guru or Mr. Anderson's guru?"

    Speaking of which, Ananta Das Babaji apparently refrains from killing mosquitoes, and has on several occasions expressed disapproval of All-Out and other such insecticides.

    I don't know if someone has since then convinced him otherwise, but at least he was against it for years.

    ReplyDelete
  16. First of all, welcome back, Ananda. I missed such a worthy opponent, that I can really get my teeth in - already only for that reason I lamented your departure from our religion. Now to your points:

    Referring to the view of the guru-authority is no doubt is an easy way to claim for reconciliation, but it is only good for yourself unless the conciliatory logic that addresses both verses can be detailed. Moreover, the view of your guru, my guru or Mr. Anderson's guru?

    That is exactly the point you have been missing while in Hinduism. Perhaps that is the reason why you had no less than five Gurus while you were with us. I admit though that being a rationalistic westerner is a great handicap too. I do admit I often neglect(ed) the Guru factor too.

    Cockroaches can be easily carried out the house and thrown far away, just as mice and rats can.

    It is obvious that you were not just saved from malaria but also from cockroaches. In 1998 my kitchen, which was, through ventilation and air-tubes, connected with 700 flats, was black with cockroaches. They dont come with 2 or 3, like rats, you know.

    A sufficient level of hygiene and tight containers, along with the occasional carrying out of a cockroach, is a fine solution for me.

    Cockroaches come after wet and warm places, which kitchens are in the cold west. They don't come after dirt (like lice by the way).

    Someone coming with an AIDS syringe isn't exactly the same as being face to face with a mosquito!!

    It is exactly the same thing - a harmful creature is coming up to you with a cannister of a lethal disease to inject you with it. It is easier to knock down the AIDS-man as it is to wham a mosquito even.

    The story of Mrigari the hunter not stepping on ants, and Jada Bharata likewise rocking the palanquin, are good case examples of nonviolent consideration vis-a-vis insects. And ants, if anyone, wreck havoc in the kitchen!

    Ants are angels compared to killers like mosquitos. I did not mention ants in the blog, though I remember when I was in the US, we had millions of ants crawling like a mobile belt all over the wall, towards the cooking pots. They too don't come in groups of 2 or 3 usually. But still, I did not even mention ants.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Speaking of which, Ananta Das Babaji apparently refrains from killing mosquitoes, and has on several occasions expressed disapproval of All-Out and other such insecticides.

    I don't know if someone has since then convinced him otherwise, but at least he was against it for years.


    Well that is the beauty of Hinduism - many Gurus, many opinions. I respect Ananta Das Ji's verdict, and of course if one can avoid killing harmful creatures by f.i. lying under a mosquito net, then so much the better.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Ananda, apart from the Guru-factor you needn't have asked for a conciliation between 7.9.14 and 5.26.17 anyway - I have already made the point in point 3 of my first reply to you that the difference lies in abhidroha, which is punishable in 5.26.17 and which is not mentioned in 7.9.14, which speaks about the self-defence which lies at the core of my blog.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It's just a one-night stand, Advaita... I don't plan to stay around commenting on each and every blog here!

    I do know my guru-concept is a bit warped from your side of the fence. Regardless, the guru's authority is derivative, not independent. And it follows that there is a certain need for explaining the "why" of the "yes" or "no".

    I admit my house has never been black with cockroaches... My cockroach levels have stayed manageable in India, and in Finland we really see them around once in a blue moon.

    Ant insurgencies we handled with bucketfuls of water thrown on the floor and flushed out the house. And I guess there was no abundance of survivors. I suppose I filed them under "terrorists". The red ones bite mean though.

    What's your take on ants, speaking of them? Good to kill in infestation cases or not?

    ReplyDelete
  20. First of all, welcome back, Ananda. I missed such a worthy opponent, that I can really get my teeth in - already only for that reason I lamented your departure from our religion.

    "Only for that reason"? I cannot believe Advaita actually said this.

    I was devastated when Ananda left.

    He was a jewel among us.

    I hope he comes back.

    ReplyDelete
  21. It's just a one-night stand, Advaita... I don't plan to stay around commenting on each and every blog here!

    I keep my fingers crossed you will sometimes come and give me that old yuddha rasa (or vAda-vivAda rasa)! (Not too often but occasionally at least)

    I do know my guru-concept is a bit warped from your side of the fence. Regardless, the guru's authority is derivative, not independent.

    No it is subjective to some extent, though that is largely observed like that by the outsider. Never so for the sisya, though. Guru tattva is a mystery which isn't easy to grasp for the rationalistic westerner. There happened to be a reconciliation between these two verses, but that is not always the case. Again, there is Guru Sadhu and Shastra and it is not that one is less than the other. There was never a tAratamya given between them.

    And it follows that there is a certain need for explaining the "why" of the "yes" or "no".

    Yes absolutely, though that cannot always be guaranteed, not out of bluff or stubbornness, but because many things can simply not be mentally or intellectually comprehended.

    Ant insurgencies we handled with bucketfuls of water thrown on the floor and flushed out the house. And I guess there was no abundance of survivors.

    So there you go. That is my point.

    I suppose I filed them under "terrorists". The red ones bite mean though. What's your take on ants, speaking of them? Good to kill in infestation cases or not?

    I remember while I stayed with Jagat in Gokulananda Ghat in Navadvip in 1983, Radhabinod Babu, the landlord, came with a huge bucket of acid and splashed it against the wall where there were a few crores of them. I objected but both Jagat and RBB said there was no other way. It is nice if that can be avoided though. nAhiMsyat sarva bhUtAni.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Only for that reason"? I cannot believe Advaita actually said this.

    I also cannot believe it, anon, because I did not say that. Read my whole sentence attentively please. I said 'already only for that reason'.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Advaita’s honesty is really refreshing. Imagine letting us in, into the practical details of his wrestle with those little pesky creatures. That is why I like him very much.

    Madhavanandadas’ insinuation that a clean environment wards off these sometime little nasties is not exactly right. I am a stickler for cleanliness. I clean my house every single week, from the toilet to the sinks and all the rooms and keep my garden clean and lawn mowed regularly (yes, I do mow my lawn myself !), but I still have had problems with ants and mice. With mice, I had to resort to the last resort - a trap, because the 4 mice I had in the past just had a jolly good cavort in my home especially in the evening. They were everywhere; their pooh were everywhere, even in the cupboard where I put the spices, and Krishna’s kitchen utensils, and in my bedroom where my deities live. They chewed away at my then new sofa, even at my work paper which was kept in my handbag, even the cord of our electric organ. My kids suggested a mouse trap but I resisted; then out of frustration I gave in, especially that I thought they might reproduce and things might get out of control. I chanted the mantra when I burried them. My house is now free of mice.


    About roaches, spiders. I don’t really kill them but throw them out of the house by cupping them off with a plastic cup or a plastic bag and while chucking them out I chant in my mind the Hare Krishna mantra. I try to avoid killing ants but in the process of clearing them away, of course most of them get killed, so I mentally chant hoping that my chanting will do them good and so do I.

    Cleaning my home is a catch 22. I clean my home to avoid it being a magnet for unpleasant creatures and to avoid musty smell. Though I only use water (no cleansing agent) to mop with a cloth –rag my timber and tiled floor, I surely kill thousands of microorganisms by my wiping action. So what to do?

    Anyway, living in this world, it is inevitable that we will ”kill". Even just by our breathing action we kill microorganisms. When we are sick the antibiotic we take is just that, to kill microorganisms. I suppose the need to preserve this body so we can pursue our spiritual activities override this kill or not to kill guilt. We ‘kill’plants for sustenance, don’t we?

    Anyway, a few Gurus I know sanction defensive-violence. And of course, there is no hard and fast rule for this. We’ll cross the bridge when I get there, I suppose.

    Radhe Radhe

    ReplyDelete
  24. "I was devastated when Ananda left. He was a jewel among us.
    I hope he comes back."

    My Dear. Your "jewel" is still alive and you are free to join him any time if you missed him so much.
    Former Madhavananda and self proclaimed Ananda rejected teachings of ADB and disrespectfully left his shelter to became buddist. This fellow should be avoided like poison.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I don't know of any disrespect to ADB. But what about the disrespect he, Ananda, was victim of?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't know of any disrespect to ADB. But what about the disrespect he, Ananda, was victim of?

    I don't want to get sucked into an affair which is not mine, and I don't want to start or prolong a discussion on this, but if you ask my take on this whole thing, of the 5 Gurus Ananda had in Hinduism/Vaishnavism, Ananta Das Ji was the real one, and he committed several offences to him, most notably accepting and worshiping another Guru (Sanatan Das) without Ananta Das Ji's permission. Srila Jiva Gosvami teaches in Bhakti Sandarbha (238):
    zrI gurväjJayä tat sevanävirodhena ca anyeSäm api vaiSNavänäM püjanaM zreyaH anyathä doSaH syät. yathä zrI näradoktau - gurau sannihite yas tu püjayed anyam agrataH. sa durgatim aväpnoti püjanaM tasya niSphalam “It is good to worship other VaiSNavas only if it is on the order of Sri Guru and does not contradict his service. Otherwise it is a fault, as is said by SrI Närada: “Whoever worships others in front of the Guru attains a bad destination and his worship will be fruitless.”
    It is also a nAmAparAdha (3): guror avajJa. Sadhu Baba said that one's bhajana may still somehow survive Vaishnavaparadha, but never Guru-aparadha. I have seen this happen many times, not just with Ananda.

    I think that Ananda himself is mostly to blame for any 'disrespect' he was 'victim' of.

    ReplyDelete
  27. **I think that Ananda himself is mostly to blame for any 'disrespect' he was 'victim' of.**

    Advaita, people leave gurus left and right, you yourself left Iskcon. Respect is a separate issue.

    If we go by your definition of disrespect - someone leaving a place where his heart is no longer at - then disrespect equals honesty.

    Why this poisonous denial of the "don't ask don't tell" culture at Radhakunda?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Advaita, people leave gurus left and right, you yourself left Iskcon.

    I left ISKCON for totally different reasons. Ananta Das Ji is in good standing, his siddhanta is OK and he comes in a genuine tradition, so that he is able to bestow siddhi on his sisyas. None of this was the case with my Iskcon Guru, Bhagavan Das.

    Respect is a separate issue.

    You need to provide more explanation of that. Leaving can be done in a respectful way, but it was not done so by Ananda. He lingered in Radhakund for 4 years after abandoning ADP.

    If we go by your definition of disrespect - someone leaving a place where his heart is no longer at - then disrespect equals honesty.

    It is not my definition of disrespect but of Sri Jiva Gosvami and Sri Narada Muni, whom I have quoted in my previous comment. Your argument is with them, not with me.

    Why this poisonous denial of the "don't ask don't tell" culture at Radhakunda?

    This is a personal attack and Vaishnavaparadha which will not be responded to, though, I must remind you, I am myself anyway not a full member of the Radhakund Samaj.

    For this blog, the discussion is closed as off-topic. If you have any other comments, please place them under my blog of March 15, where it is on-topic. If deemed worthwhile I will respond to them there. If you post any more comments on this topic here under this blog, I will myself post them anonymously under the blog of March 15.

    ReplyDelete