Saturday, May 19, 2018

24x7 Hare Krishna Kirtan Radio (

Sinful King Saved from Yamaraja (Garga Samhita)

Lord Yamaraja

In Sindhu-desha there was a king named Dirghabahu. He was very cruel and sinful and he was addicted to visiting prostitutes. While he was on the earth this cruel sinner murdered a hundred brahmanas and ten pregnant women.

One day, as he mounted a sindhu horse and went hunting. While he was shooting arrows to hunt, he accidentally killed a brown cow.

One day, his angry minister killed him in the forest, in order to take over his kingdom.

Seeing him fallen to the ground and dead, the Yamadutas came, bound him by their nooses, and, took him to the city of Yamaraja.

Seeing this sinner brought before him, powerful Yamaraja said to his scribe Chitragupta, "What is the proper punishment for him?"

Sri Chitragupta said: O my Lord, he should be thrown into eight million four hundred thousand hells for as long as the sun and the moon shine in the sky. On the earth he did not perform a single pious deed. He killed ten pregnant women. He killed a brown cow. He killed thousands of deer in the forest. He offended the demigods and the brahmanas. He is a great sinner.

Sri Narada said: Then, by
Yamaraja’s order, the Yamadutas took that sinner and threw him into a terrible, eight-thousand mile wide cauldron of bubbling boiling oil in the hell of Kumbhipaka.

The moment that sinner came close to the oil, the boiling oil, which was as hot as the great fires at the time of cosmic devastation, suddenly became cool.

O King of Videha, as Prahlada was unhurt in a similar situation, that sinner was not hurt at all by the boiling oil.

The Yamadutas were shocked and ran to describe this great wonder to noble-hearted Yamaraja.

Yamaraja and Chitragupta carefully reviewed the sinner's case and concluded that while he was on the earth, the sinner had not for a moment performed even a single pious deed.

Just at that moment Sri Vyasadev arrived in that assembly. Bowing down before Him, and carefully worshiping Him, saintly and noble-hearted Yamaraja asked Vyasadeva the following question:

Sri Yamaraja said: When a certain sinner, who had never performed even a single pious deed on earth, was thrown into the pot of terrible boiling oil of Kumbhipaka, the oil suddenly became cool. Because of this my mind is now troubled with doubts.

*Sri Vyasadev said: O great king, the intelligent sages, who have studied all the scriptures, know that the ways of piety, sin, and spiritual progress are very subtle and difficult to understand.*

Somehow or other, by destiny, this sinner did perform a pious deed unknowingly, and by that deed he became purified. O noble-hearted one, please hear what is that pious deed performed by him.

This sinner died in a place where some gopi-candana had accidentally fallen from some devotee's hand. Because of dying while touching gopi-candana, that sinner became purified.

*A person who wears gopi-candana tilaka attains a spiritual form like that of Lord Narayana.*

*Simply by seeing a devotee with gopi chandan one becomes free of the sin of killing a brahmana.*

Sri Narada said: Hearing this, Yamaraja, who understands the glories of gopi-candana, took the sinner, placed him on an airplane that goes anywhere at will, and sent him to Vaikuntha. O King, thus I have described to you the glories of Gopi-candana.

*One who hears this account of Gopi-candana's glories becomes exalted. He goes to the supreme abode of Lord Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead.*

(Sri Garga Samhita)

Funding needed for China temple

Food For Life (UK) Funder on 26 May 2018

[PADA: Maybe some of the UK ritviks can attend and help spread the word. Yes, some "Food For Life" people in other countries complained to PADA some time ago -- they have to fund their own program, and ISKCON does not support them. Then later, sometimes ISKCON GBC types try to advertise that this is their program. 

They are trying to take credit for a program they are not funding or helping? 

Some folks have criticized that distributing Krishna prasad is "mundane welfare work," ok well maybe the Krishna religion folks overall should try to engage in some "mundane welfare work" to boost the image of the religion, which isn't that great these days. At the same time we encourage people to make their own independent charities, funding and programs etc. 

We cannot rely on using the official ISKCON names and titles at this stage because for starters, we cannot work with their leaders and their "mundane gurus" agenda. Some of these food for life people are also doing harinama and other programs in UK as well, very good! ys pd]  

Friday, May 18, 2018

Traditional Sheenai Music (Video)

Minimizing women in modern society?

[PADA: A problem that exists in the outside society, but seems to have at least in part sneaked into sectors of ISKCON? ys pd]

"gofundme" Academic Symposium on BBT Editing (Garuda das)

[PADA: Great idea, however, what happens if the official BBT managers do not accept the conclusions of the symposium? Aren't we back to square one? ys pd]

Commentary on "A Note About the Second Edition"


INTRODUCTION: In 1972, Śrīla Prabhupāda published his translation of and commentary on Bhagavad Gītā with Collier Macmillan (MAC72), and many millions of copies were distributed and sold. After Śrīla Prabhupāda departed from this world, the BBT, for their reasons, published a revised version, second edition of his work in 1983 (BBT83). Appearing on page 766 in the BBT83 edition, signed "—The Publishers" (or appearing on page 866 or on page 868 in later BBT83 editions, without the bolded signature, "the Publishers"), is a singular page, entitled "A Note About the Second Edition." While the Publishers attempt to justify their later revised edition of Śrīla Prabhupāda's Bhagavad Gītā in this note, my comments here will attempt to show how, ironically, their words in this note unintentionally reveal inadequacies and flaws in their justifications.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "For the benefit of readers who have become familiar with the first edition of the Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, a few words about this second edition seem in order."

MY COMMENT: Beginning with this opening line, I have several questions: Why just for the benefit of readers who "have become familiar with the first edition"? Why not also for the benefit of those who never read the first edition? And, why not even merely out of respect for Śrīla Prabhupāda's MAC72 edition that he gave to us? And why should this note not be for those general readers who may wish to understand the rationale behind a second edition generally?

The use of the word "familiar," to me, is peculiar. Most of the persons who had "become familiar with the first edition" were not merely familiar with it, but, more accurately, highly treasured it. In many cases, the first edition transformed a person's life into that of a Krishna Bhakta. That kind of transformation indicates a relationship with Prabhupāda's book that is more than one of mere familiarity. I would suggest here that it is certainly not only dangerous to minimize the powerful impact of the MAC72 edition of the BG, but that addressing the so-called readers "familiar" with the first edition is perhaps a conscious or unconscious intention on the part of "the editors" to diminish the importance of the first edition as compared with the second edition justified in this note.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "Although in most respects the two editions are the same, the editors of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust have gone back to the oldest manuscripts in their archives to make this second edition even more faithful to Śrīla Prabhupāda's original work."

MY COMMENT: Wait a minute . . . how can anything become more faithful to Śrīla Prabhupāda's original work when he himself originally submitted his own work for publication with a prestigious publisher? This is a dangerous assertion, as the "editors" are saying that they are more faithful in the second edition than Śrīla Prabhupāda was to his own work when he submitted it. And that somehow the "editors" know better than Śrīla Prabhupāda what is more faithful or truer to his own work than he is himself and, moreover, ignores the crucial fact that he never requested an "even more faithful" work to be published later or after he would depart from this world.

Another curious thing. If in fact the two editions are "in most respects . . . the same," then just how much more could the second edition be faithful to "Śrīla Prabhupāda's original work"? If they're virtually the same, why make any changes at all? My understanding is that there have been some glaring changes that are not faithful either to his earlier manuscripts nor to the MAC72, and thus we are looking into this carefully.

Now, let's just say that the BBT83 is truly more guided by "the oldest manuscripts in their archives." Prabhupāda never asked anyone to go back to his earlier or earliest drafts of a book he ended up submitting to and publishing with a major world publishing house. The author-translator was alive when he made that choice. It is not as though the BBT editors had to go back to the earliest manuscripts to determine what the true text is of this deceased author—the author consciously and deliberately submitted and signed off on this publication with Collier Macmillan. Moreover, Śrīla Prabhupāda utilized the MAC72 edition for five years in over 250 classes on the Bhagavad Gītā. So why this misapplied, artificial application of historical-critical analysis of Prabhupāda's published BG against his "oldest manuscripts" when he was satisfied with his originally published MAC72 work except for specific changes that he is on record requesting or that are obvious mistakes?

Anyone would have to conclude here that somehow the BBT "editors" know better what is truer to Prabhupāda than Prabhupāda himself, perhaps rationalized by thoughts such as the following: "back in the day, Prabhupāda was rushed and he didn't have the time to do what he really wanted to do, but we know what he really wanted to do from his earliest drafts," or "the devotees editing back then didn't know what they were doing, so Prabhupāda compromised what he really wanted in his publication," or "Prabhupāda didn't know English that well and needed help with that," and "some of the earlier editors were on drugs and had long hair and were hardly capable or qualified to assist Prabhupāda's translation." So are we to believe that Śrīla Prabhupāda did not know with whom he was working at the time? And are we to conclude that Śrīla Prabhupāda was incapable of engaging these contaminated or incompetent souls despite their shortcomings? I don't agree. One of Śrīla Prabhupāda's many miracles was, and still is, that he could take you or me, or for that matter anyone else, and engage them and us in Krishna's sevā despite all shortcomings.

Finally, note the phrase, "the editors." Who are these editors? To my knowledge, there is Jayadvaita Swami, and that's it. No matter whom he may have consulted, no matter how much he may have been aided by others, still, it is my understanding that this second edition, the BBT83, is solely his work for which he alone is responsible since he had the ultimate editorial authority to accept or dismiss changes in Prabhupada's BG. There are no other editors of the BBT who worked on the BG with the Swami who had equal say and influence as did Jayadvaita Swami. So why not mention his name in this note? The person who is solely responsible for the BBT83 edition? Everyone knows it is he who is responsible for it, so why not print that information to convey a sense of honest and full disclosure?

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "Śrīla Prabhupāda finished Bhagavad-gītā As It Is in 1967, two years after he came from India to America. The Macmillan Company published an abridged edition in 1968 and the first unabridged edition in 1972."

MY COMMENT: Let's more accurately and more fully present the incredible accomplishments that Śrīla Prabhupāda made at the time. Collier Books of the Collier-Macmillan Ltd., London published in 1968 an abridged edition with the prefaced or introductory words by the likes of Allen Ginsberg, Denise Levertov, and Thomas Merton. Wow! I would have loved to have had all three introduce any of my books, especially Merton.

And then in 1972, Collier Books, A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. published the unabridged edition of Śrīla Prabhupāda's Bhagavad Gītā, with another intellectual luminary, Professor Edward C. Dimock, Jr. who was teaching at the time at the University of Chicago.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "The new American disciples who helped Śrīla Prabhupāda ready the manuscript for publication struggled with several difficulties. Those who transcribed his taped dictation sometimes found his heavily accented English hard to follow and his Sanskrit quotations strange to their ears. The Sanskrit editors had to do their best with a manuscript spotted with gaps and phonetic approximations. Yet their effort to publish Śrīla Prabhupāda's work was a success, and Bhagavad-gītā As It Is has become the standard edition for scholars and devotees around the world."

MY COMMENT: No doubt, there were challenges back then. But does anyone doubt that Śrīla Prabhupāda was unaware of these challenges? Somehow, as an a priori assumption, Śrīla Prabhupāda was aware of these challenges and the possibility of errors along the way, so he was concerned that there would be "no mistakes" in his books. But he was also just as concerned, even firm about "no changes" to the content. It is possible that "the editors" of the BBT83 edition have inflated this notion of "mistake" to the point of making changes to the content that were not only unnecessary on an editing level but not faithful to the content of what Śrīla Prabhupāda offered his reader. I believe that this is the crux of the matter, which calls for careful review.

The last sentence is curious, though. It claims that Śrīla Prabhupāda's work was "a success" because it became the standard edition "for scholars and devotees around the world." Wow. Understated points in the BBT note are as intriguing as the present overstated or hyperbolic point. In no way has Śrīla Prabhupāda's BG become the "standard edition for scholars," or, what to speak of, "scholars around the world." Although I am happy to see here in the Note that there is an interest on the part of the BBT editors to satisfy scholars on some level. Indeed, Śrīla Prabhupāda's MAC72 edition did attract the attention and numerous endorsements from scholars especially in the US and Europe. I wonder why no one has sought endorsements for the BBT83 edition.

The last statement of this paragraph also claims that Śrīla Prabhupāda's work has become the standard edition for "devotees around the world." Doesn't the publisher mean more accurately, ISKCON devotees around the world? Surely it doesn't mean the Shaiva or Shakta devotees, and for that matter, devotees of other Western traditions. Moreover, there are many devotees that do not see the BBT83 as the standard edition and thus seek out publishers who still print the MAC72 edition.

Again, we find more hyperbole, which is concerning. But if the publisher really believes its own statement that the book became the standard for scholars and devotees, then why would there be any need to fix that which has worked so well and so powerfully? Thus, I don't think the publisher believes its own statement given the exaggerative language it has engaged. More accurately, it is the one book of Śrīla Prabhupāda that was a key factor in establishing the Krishna consciousness movement in the West, which saw a dramatic expansion in the US from the date of the publication of the BG in 1972 to the time Śrīla Prabhupāda departed 1977, and even beyond into the 1980's.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "For this second edition, however, Śrīla Prabhupāda's disciples had the benefit of having worked with his books for fifteen years. The English editors were familiar with his philosophy and language, and the Sanskrit editors were by now accomplished scholars. And now they were able to see their way through perplexities in the manuscript by consulting the same Sanskrit commentaries Śrīla Prabhupāda consulted when writing Bhagavad-gītā As It Is."

MY COMMENT: What does this mean: "the benefit of having worked with his books for fifteen years"? About what kind of work are we speaking here? Creative editing? Editing for content? Editing out errors only? Or invasively corrective editing? It is not clear at all what it means to have worked with Śrīla Prabhupāda's books. Were these "disciples" (again, note the plural) professionally trained devotees or were they auto-didacts? Now, we are informed that the editors were more familiar with Śrīla Prabhupāda's philosophy and language. Again, how is this much of a qualification? Did these editors receive any formal training or education in editing? There are such trainings. My sense is that "they" did not.

Then we are told that the Sanskrit editors (who are they!?) were "by now accomplished scholars." Really? Who are these "accomplished scholars"? There were none back in the day, to my knowledge, when this edition was being produced. But they too should be named and credited for all their fine work, shouldn't they? Wouldn't BBT be proud to name these "accomplished scholars"? Again, this claim is confounding to me.

The last sentence is curious . . . the editors needed to find their way "through perplexities in the manuscript by consulting the same Sanskrit commentaries Śrīla Prabhupāda consulted . . ." This method should raise eyebrows. Again, are the "editors" and accomplished Sanskrit scholars needing to correct or rewrite the content of Śrīla Prabhupāda's writing? Really? Exactly what was the need to do this? This is not explained.

The decisions that must be made in the delicate task of professional editing requires training, experience, and theological sensitivity in addition to common sense. It should not be a "learn-as-we-work-for-years" with the same texts, inviting crowd-sourced critiques, suggestions, and corrections, which has been their method for years. Rather, it should be genuinely authoritative and respectful of the original author, following the strict instructions from the author for such a task with his own work.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: "The result is a work of even greater richness and authenticity. The word-for-word Sanskrit-English equivalents now follow more closely the standard of Śrīla Prabhupāda's other books and are therefore more clear and precise. In places the translations, though already correct, have been revised to come closer to the original Sanskrit and to Śrīla Prabhupāda's original dictation. In the Bhaktivedanta purports, many passages lost to the original edition have been restored to their places. And Sanskrit quotations whose sources were unnamed in the first edition now appear with full references to chapter and verse."

MY COMMENT: The Publishers' claim here is that there is even "greater richness and authenticity" with the revised BBT83 edition of Śrīla Prabhupāda's BG. Apparently Śrīla Prabhupāda didn't desire or know how to make his work more authentic or richer, or maybe he didn't have time to do so, since he was rushed. Whatever the reason that the editors give to justify their reworking/revising the original text, the BBT editors have come to rescue the work out of its proven extraordinary success, from 1972 through 1983. I don't doubt that there was a valid but modest editorial cleaning up of the text that any publisher would ordinarily insist upon, but to go further than this is where serious issues arise. To go back to Śrīla Prabhupāda's "oldest manuscripts" as if they were representative of what he truly desired for the very book he personally authorized in the end carries with it an assumption that the BBT editors know better what Śrīla Prabhupāda desired for his BG than he did. Moreover, it transgresses the basic emphatic instruction of Śrīla Prabhupāda, which is "no changes!" and ignores the severe warning he so powerfully characterized as "the change disease."

Does it strike anyone reading this . . . going back to the words quoted above . . . that it is rather forward of the "editors" to assume that they can bestow greater richness" and "greater authenticity" on Śrīla Prabhupāda's Bhagavad Gītā? Wasn't Śrīla Prabhupāda the embodiment of authenticity? Of the Krishna Bhakti teachings and guru paramparā? What more authenticity could these BBT editors and supposed Sanskrit scholars lend to Śrīla Prabhupāda's work?

If these were themselves not serious enough concerns, then perhaps this one, maybe the ultimate one, has to do with the theological value in treasuring what it was that Krishna and Śrīla Prabhupāda left us: A gift that he so enjoyed for several years without any indication that more editing was required—a gift from which the Movement thrived like no other time—a gift through which divine grace surely had come and still comes to so many precisely because this is what he gave us and left for us—it is his legacy. And to do anything more than just the absolutely modest, few, necessary editorial corrections to Śrīla Prabhupāda's work, is to dethrone the divine grace that flows from it. I believe that this is what agonizes so many devotees, which they may have been unable to articulate fully. And to make matters worse and likely more agonizing, to conduct years of a kind of crowd-source editing, constantly changing things forward and backward as devotees object to this and that, etc., makes a mockery of the very blessings that Śrīla Prabhupāda's BG has embodied in the MAC72 edition.

I have begun to understand the anguish, and the sense of hopelessness and helplessness that so many devotees feel in regard to this extremely central issue. Again, I apologize here as I have elsewhere for assuming that the BBT as a publisher was doing its job professionally and assuming that the BBT editors were trustworthy in their sevā, maturing as we all naturally do as we delve more deeply into a life of Krishna bhakti. I am sorry that I was unaware of the extent that the BBT editors have overreached in their editing work, trying to enhance Śrīla Prabhupāda's work, trying to correct him or make him more consistent with his own words, etc. And now I'm attempting to do something about it.

BBT PUBLISHERS' NOTE: —The Publishers [please note that some of the BBT printings don't have this signature on the page]
MY COMMENT: The Publishers? Aren't we really talking about Jayadvaita Brahmacari and later Swami here, who has always been the BBT's absolute authority on editing? The judge, the jury, the defense, the offense, the whole adjudicative burden of assessing the editing responsibility? Hasn't it always rested on his shoulders? Hasn't he had the supreme trans-zonal/trans-guru power in the Movement to say ultimately what stays in Śrīla Prabhupāda's books and what does not?

MY CONCLUDING COMMENT: This printed note at the back of the various second edition BBT83 printings of the BG, in my opinion (devotional as well as professional), is simply an inadequate explanation for the justification of the second edition: it is verbose, it contains understated facts with some overstated claims and hyperboles, and it addresses too narrow a readership. It is not only inadequate, it is unacceptable, as it is misleading in many ways and, upon examination, it reads as a rather sloppy explanation.

Surely, we are beyond this kind of thing now, aren't we? Any reader of Śrīla Prabhupāda's revised edition of his original work deserves a far more honest, a more precise explanation. A very different kind of note should have been produced for this second edition that addresses ALL readers, which more accurately, more succinctly and straightforwardly presents the editorial processes involved and the names of the persons responsible for them, along with their qualifications.

Importance of arcana (deity worship)

Importance of arcana (deity worship)

[PADA: For many devotees living outside ISKCON it is harder for them to engage in opulent deity and kirtan programs. So these devotees can at least hear Krishna conscious audios or read original edition books, and there are so many web sites now that provide these services. 

Many outside folks have their own home deity as well, and that is also a wonderful idea -- if it is possible according to their living situations. The overall idea is to think of Krishna as much as possible, with the goal of thinking of Krishna full time i.e. 24 / 7. At the same time, there are a few independent fully functioning temples, like the one locally in Sunnyvale, so if it is possible to start such programs that is another great idea.

A devotee once told Srila Prabhupada -- we are in Krishna consciousness but sometimes fall into maya consciousness. And he said no, you are in maya consciousness and you sometimes fall into Krishna consciousness. Hee hee! ys pd]  

1.) A devotee must visit a Visnu temple at least once or twice every day, morning and evening.
– Nectar of Devotion Chap. 6

2.) ….The actual import of the verse is that one must see the form of Govinda if one at all wants to forget the nonsense of material friendship, love and society.
(Below, is the actual verse spoken of above.)

Rupa Gosvami has stated that five kinds of devotional activities namely, residing in Mathura, worshiping the Deity of the Lord, reciting Srimad-Bhagavatam, serving a devotee, and chanting the Hare Krishna mantra – are so potent that a small attachment for any one of these five items can arouse devotional ecstasy even in a neophyte.

Regarding worship of the form of the Lord, or Deity, Rupa Gosvami has written the following verse:

"My dear friend, if you still have any desire to enjoy the company of your friends within this material world, then don't look upon the form of Krishna, who is standing on the bank of Kesi-ghata [a bathing place in Vrindavana]. He is known as Govinda, and His eyes are very enchanting. He is playing upon His flute, and on His head there is a peacock feather. And His whole body is illuminated by the moonlight in the sky."

The purport of this verse is that if someone becomes attached to the Sri Murti, or Deity of Krishna, by worshiping at home, then he will forget his relationships of so-called friendship, love and society. Thus it is the duty of every householder to install Deities of the Lord at home and to begin the process of worshiping along with all of his family members. This will save everyone from such unwanted activities as going to clubs, cinemas, dancing parties, smoking, drinking, etc. All such nonsense will be forgotten if one stresses the worship of the Deities at home.

Rupa Gosvami further writes, "My dear foolish friend, I think that you have already heard some of the auspicious Srimad-Bhagavatam, which decries seeking the results of fruitive activities, economic development and liberation. I think now it is certain that gradually the verses of the Tenth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, describing the pastimes of the Lord, will enter your ears and go into your heart."

In the beginning of the Srimad-Bhagavatam it is said that unless one has the capacity to throw out, just like garbage, the fruitive results of ritualistic ceremonies, economic development and becoming one with the supreme (or salvation), one cannot understand Srimad-Bhagavatam. The Bhagavatam deals exclusively with devotional service. Only one who studies Srimad-Bhagavatam in the spirit of renunciation can understand the pastimes of the Lord which are described in the Tenth Canto. In other words, one should not try to understand the topics of the Tenth Canto, such as the rasa-lila (love dance), unless he has spontaneous attraction for Srimad-Bhagavatam. One must be situated in pure devotional service before he can relish Srimad-Bhagavatam as it is.

In the above two verses of Rupa Gosvami, there are some metaphorical analogies, which indirectly condemn the association of materialistic society, friendship and love. People are generally attracted to society, friendship and love, and they make elaborate arrangements and strong endeavors to develop these material contaminations; but to see the Sri Murtis of Radha and Krishna is to forget such endeavors for material association. Rupa Gosvami composed his verse in such a way that he was seemingly praising the material association of friendship, love, etc., and was condemning the audience of Sri Murtis or Govinda. This metaphorical analogy is constructed in such a way that things which seem to be praised are condemned, and things which are to be condemned are praised. The actual import of the verse is that one must see the form of Govinda if one at all wants to forget the nonsense of material friendship, love and society.
– Nectar of Devotion Chap. 13

3.) If one attains perfection in Deity worship, that is called Archana Siddhi. Archana Siddhi means simply by Deity worship one goes back to Godhead, immediately after this life. So this Archana Siddhi program is given in the Narada Pancharatra especially for the householders. Householders cannot undergo strict disciplinary activities of austerity, therefore for every householder the path of Archana Siddhi is very much recommended.

– Letter to: Himavati, 18 March, 1969

4.) Archana means to worship the Deity in the temple. By executing this process one confirms himself as not body but spirit soul. In the Tenth Canto, 81st Chapter, 16th verse, of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, it is told how Sudama, an intimate friend of Krishna, while going to the house of a brahmana murmured to himself, "Simply by worshiping Krishna one can easily achieve all the results of heavenly opulence, liberation, supremacy over the planetary systems of the universe, all the opulences of this material world, and the mystic power of performing the yoga system.

– Nectar of Devotion Chap. 9

Sad plight of India's farmers

[PADA: The government seems to be the source of the problem here rather than being a solution. ys pd]

Thursday, May 17, 2018

Symptoms of Kali Yuga (Uddhava Gita)

Once the four Pandavas (except Yudhishthira who was not present) asked Krishna:

"What is Kaliyuga and what will happen during Kaliyuga?"

Krishna smiled and said "Let me demonstrate to you, the situation of Kaliyuga." He took a bow and four arrows and shot them in four directions and ordered the four Pandavas to go and bring them back.

Each of the four Pandavas went in the four different directions to search for the arrows.

When Arjuna picked an arrow, he heard a very sweet voice. He turned around and saw a cuckoo singing in a spellbinding voice but was also eating flesh of a live rabbit which was in great pain. Arjuna was very surprised to see such a gory act by such a divine bird he left the place immediately.

Bhima picked arrow from a place, where five wells were situated. The four wells were surrounding a single well. The four wells were overflowing with very sweet water as if they were not able to hold water and surprisingly the well in the middle of these four overflowing wells was completely empty. Bhima was also puzzled at this sight.

Nakula was returning to the place after picking up the arrow. He stopped at a place where a cow was about to give birth. After giving birth the cow started licking the calf but continued to lick it even after the calf was clean. With great difficulty people were able to separate them and by that time the calf was injured badly. Nakula was puzzled by the behaviour of such a calm animal.

Sahadeva picked arrow which fell near a mountain and saw a big boulder falling. The boulder was crushing the rocks and big trees on its way down, but the same boulder was stopped by a small plant. Sahadeva was also amazed at this sight.

All the Pandavas asked the meaning of these incidents. Krishna smiled and started explaining...

"In Kaliyuga, the priests will have very sweet voice and will also have great knowledge but they will exploit devotees the same way cuckoo was doing with rabbit.

In Kaliyuga poor will live among rich, those rich will have enormous amount of wealth which will actually overflow but they will not offer a single penny to the poor same as the four wells didn't have a single drop of water for the empty well.

In Kaliyuga parents will love their children so much that their love will actually spoil them and will destroy their lives similar to the love shown by cow to her newborn calf.

In Kaliyuga people will fall in terms of character like the boulder from the mountain and they will not be stopped by anyone at the end only the name of God will be able to hold them from doom like the little plant held the boulder from further fall."

~ Uddhava Gita, Srimad Bhaagawatam

Narada Muni Discovers the Power of Maya

[PADA: This story was on ISKCON Desire Tree. Not sure how truly authentic it is, but it is quite entertaining. The moral of the story is certainly true! ys pd]

Power of maya!

Once Narada Muni who is very intimate devotee of the Lord has meet Krishna.

And while they were walking, Narada Muni asked Lord Krishna, “My dear Krishna, can you please show me power of your maya, your illusiory energy? Please explain to me the secret of this magic called maya and how she act?”

Sri Krishna hesitated to do it. So Krishna asked his dear devotee:

My dear Narada are you sure you want to see power of my maya!?

Narada was very detirmened so he said: Yes, Krishna i am sure. I want to see power of your maya!

Lord Krishna replied : Ok Narada i will show you. Let’s lie down here in the shade and I shall tell you everything. But first, Narada, it’s terribly hot; would you get me a cool glass of water?”

“Right away,” Narada promised happy to do some serviceto his beloved Lord krishna. He set out across the fields. The sun beat down and though he was a good walker, the little line of thatched cottages on the horizon that marked the nearest village seemed no closer as he strode along. The heat grew unbearable. Narada’s throat became parched too; he began to think that he would ask for two glasses of water, and drink the second himself.

Finally he reached the village and ran to the nearest house. The door opened – and there stood the most beautiful girl he had ever seen. She smiled up at Narada through long, dark lashes and something happened to him that had never happened before. All he could do was to look at her beatiful face. Finally he spoke out, “Will you marry me?” That is the Indian way; you cannot just say, “What are you doing on Saturday night?”

The couple settled down to a life of family bliss. After a while, children began to arrive. Narada’s became a very animated household.

Somebody was always being bathed or dressed; there were meals to get and people to be provided for. And all these things were filling up their lives. Narada and his wife became engrossed in their private little world, quietly building their dreams. Years passed. The children grew up, went to school, got married; in time, grandchildren arrived. Narada became the patriarch of a great family, respected by the whole village; his lands stretched to the horizon. He and his wife would look at each other fondly and say, “Don’t you think being grandparents is the greatest thing on earth?”

Then a flood came. The village fields became a raging river, and before Narada’s helpless eyes, everything that he loved and lived for – his lands, his cattle, his house, but especially his beloved wife and all their children and grandchildren – were swept away. Of all the village, only he remained.

He was trying to save them from all this calamities but was not successful.

Unable to watch the destruction, Narada fell to his knees and cried for help from the very depths of his heart.

“Krishna! Krishna!”

At once, the raging floods disappeared and there was Sri Krishna, standing casually on the fields where they had walked what seemed to be so many years before.

“Narada,” the Lord asked gently, “where is my glass of water?”


This is power of maya. She make us forget lotus feet of Krishna. She overcome us and we forget our Lord. We have done this for millions of lives in this material world. It has been our desire to be in maya as Narada wanted to see her. We are all in situation as great sage Narada has in this story. To be free from this illusion of the Lord we must cry his holy name:

Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare
Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.

Sri Krishna says in Bhagavad gita 7.14:

daivī hy eṣā guṇa-mayī
mama māyā duratyayā
mām eva ye prapadyante
māyām etāṁ taranti te

This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it.

HKC Jaipur Rejects PADA's Peace Proposal? (Child abuse issue update)

PADA: OK so we recently put out a "peace proposal" for Dayalu Nitai's HKC Jaipur folks, and their apparent counter reply to us is, they are digging in their heels still supporting Prahlad's (Paul Coats UK?) program which says -- PADA is wrong to have helped dismantle the bogus GBC's child molester webs, nests and infrastructure project. Yep, stopping children from being abused is a big no, no in HKC world -- self-apparently.   

Had that infrastructure NOT been dismantled starting around 1999, many parents would NOT have pulled out their hundreds of kids out of these bogus "guru schools," and worse many more kids would have still been pumped in, and sent off to that odious machine -- where more victimization was possible if not probable. So Prahlad and his HKC Jaipur's fan club's BIG PLAN has been, and apparently STILL IS -- to keep these type molester regimes going, and not have us help take them down -- at all!  

Let the molesting party keep partying! That is their plan to fix the world? Has any of these HKC folks ever asked the victims if this was the better plan? Did we forget to mention -- the bogus GBC's plan was to NOT help us take this down either? Ditto heads of a feather?

Of course the only good news is, this TOTALLY confirms everything we have said about this issue up to now? Prahlad das and his HKC Jaipur disciples are apparently quite happy to see many small children being victimized by an odious abuse regime, otherwise why would they vociferously oppose us having this regime dismantled? Or as one victim says, why are they molester program's lovers? Can't really repeat what some other victims said about Prahlad and his HKC disciples on a public forum!

Now some folks in the middle of all this keep sending me photos of HKC kirtans and programs, trying to show me this is a bona fide program. OK but the GBC's programs ALSO had ALL sorts of kirtans going on all along in the 1980s -- when we tried to address the attitude of the GBC's leaders towards the molesting issue then. So kirtans are nice no doubt, but the topic here is -- what is the attitude of these leaders and elders -- of either ISKCON / or HKC -- towards abuse and molesting? In other words, before we get into a process of exploiting people's sentiments with kirtan, we want to know -- what is that program's policy about abuse?   

And it is increasingly clear, the HKC Jaipur's top leadership types have sided with Prahlad's process -- that we should NOT have DISMANTLED these vicious mass molesting nests and rings, and the HKC still are apparently his disciples on this topic. OK so what makes them any different from Tamal's and Kirtanananda's regimes, on this issue? Again, sticking with the issue at hand? Molester programs should not be dismantled? That is their plan? Same plan as the bogus GBC ilk orchestrators of this regime?

And this is Prahlad's mantra that he has trained the HKC in? Why do they vociferously oppose having mass molesting stopped, unless they are on the side of that agenda? Why would they be on the side of the abuse regime and still claim to be reformers?     

KD: Watching HKC from last one decade, never seen Crawford prabhu visiting HKC or HKV. May be once / twice in 10 years. This is far less than the time than what Prahlad prabhu and me have spent with HKC devotees. What to speak of believing his words about HKC.

OK so Prahlad is STILL the self-evidently welcomed shiksha guru of the HKC Jaipur's folks on this molesting issue, which is what we said all along? And on Prahlad's web site it STILL says -- PADA is wrong to have opposed the molesting regime, and Prahlad is STILL infuriated took we took their program down to the mat. OK so he is clearly a molester regime lover. Prahlad direct or de facto says: he wanted the molesting program to continue, because -- we should not have taken it down, its on his own site?  

Peter prabhu keeps asking me, where is the written proof? OK, and as we said many times HERE on this blog -- its ON Prahlad's own SITE. He opposes us dismantling the mass child abuse infrastructure. He openly states that. And HKC people are his disciples ON THIS ISSUE, if not why have they agreed with him in the past and never stated otherwise? And why are they still saying he is with HKC folks many times over the past ten years, if he is not a welcomed guest (and adviser, as he was on this issue in the past)?

Bhakta Peter ... Let me clarify -- the general (HKC Jaipur) congregation is not sophisticated with the internet, but the devotees there running things all have engineering degrees. The dozen or so devotees there that do run things all have engineering degrees, and do have diverse skills. They are much more educated then 99% of devotees in general. How many devotees do you know that have REAL engineering degrees? They are more educated then you Mr. PADA.

Wow! So in order to become one of the best boot licker disciples of the biggest advocate of keeping child molesting regimes running, I would need a college degree in engineering? This is getting more silly by the moment? What good is a PHD in engineering -- if one STILL does not know child molester regimes need to be dismantled? And that people who favor keeping molesting regimes going are deviants and not our welcomed shiksha gurus? 

So this confirms what we said all along, some HKC top tier folks sided with Prahlad's plan of -- KEEPING THE MOLESTING going. And they thus sided with KEEPING THE MARRIAGES of underage girls to much older men (against their will). And they also sided with not having us help save people from suicide. etc!

And you'd need a PHD to be such a child oppressing deviant?

Sorry, there are billions of dogs on this planet and not one of them tried to impede us from saving hundreds of children from victimization, bogus marriages and suicide? The only entities that try to halt us from doing that are in human bodies. And we should name some of those bodies, ok GBC folks and their HKC henchmen disciples like Prahlad das and his HKC clones. Yes, even a dog with no PHD does not try to stop us from saving children, only these folks do. That means dogs have better behavior than these PHD graduates? 

Anyway, again the only good news is --this confirms EVERYTHING WE SAID all along on this topic. Please do not send me anymore HKC kirtan photos, seen that, done that, been there already in the 1980s. The GBC folks also told me the same things, so what -- we have nice kirtan? OK, but a nice kirtan program does not make a license to oppose people who dismantle child abuse programs.

I also pray that the HKC children there in their guru school are not being told that it is a good idea to keep child abuse regimes going without being checked.  Anyway now you all know why this had to go to public police, FBI, media and public court etc., these type people sided with the oppressors, forcing the issue into the public courts.
 ys pd    

PS: Correct prabhu, many people leave ISKCON physically but remain there in sentiment and following the same deviant policies and ideals. Right! We cannot simultaneously "reform" the Krishna religion and act exactly like the deviants we are trying to reform from. Goody! ys pd

Prithu Putra and Malati Dasi's Devilish Program (Russian Language)

Gopal Kidz Sunday School (Sunnyvale)

Wednesday, May 16, 2018

Sri Radha Kripa Kataksha Stava Raja (video)

"Vrndavana Today" Editor Replaced

[PADA: Some sort of editorial power struggle going on here? Well that's about par for the course, devotees fighting over the post of editor, manager, guru and so forth. I'm pretty much done with all that personally, thank you Jesus.

But! Not sure why so many people went along with the bogus GBC's guru process for so long? They did not see the writing on the wall earlier? 

Part of the "new management team" apparently used to work for Hrdayananda's program. Not sure how this will all pan out, we'll have to see. It is good to have transparency of course, and we hope more emphasis will be placed on examining the GBC's guru process going on there in the dham. 

At least this "former editor" wrote some form of apology / attempt at explanation, very few others ever do so. As far as we know, this person was not a sexual abuser himself, but he seems to have known there were problems and did not act accordingly. Anyway, what is worse is -- bogus ISKCON GBC sometimes places former trouble makers of various types as their senior leaders or even gurus. ys pd]

Any comments or updates? :

The other "Vrndavana news" site ---

Arizona Cow Shelter / Goshala Project