From: ------ dasa
Subject: Re: Guru falling down answer
Date: Wednesday, March 30, 2011, 5:33 PM
Dear ----- Prabhu
Please accept my pranams. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada. Thank you for your email. I also included several articles as attachments, read and study them. Basically there are several points for consideration.
1) Srila Prabhupada never gave most of these "fallen guru" quotes or elaborated on fallen acaryas or deviant gurus, rather His approach always was that the bona fide spiritual master does not fall down and is always perfectly situated.
2) None of Srila Prabhupada's predecessor acaryas in our disciplic succession have ever exhibited any symptoms of fallen souls or fallen down.
3) The kind of activities we have seen from some of these ISKCON gurus since post November 1977 include, but are not necessarily limited to, homosexuality, illicit sex with their own disciples, sex with children, intoxication, embezzlement, stealing from the temple, orchestrating beating devotees, kicking devotes out of the temples, and in some instances orchestrating the assassination of vaishnavas etc.
So the question comes to mind? Which previous Vaishnava acaryas have ever behaved like this? Answer: No one.
4) In 1996 Jayadvaita made a paper where he stated that "some of our ISKCON gurus had illicit sex with men, women and possibly children as well".
So Prabhu do the following exercise. Go to the original unrevised Bhagavad-Gita As It Is and go to the end of the introduction and the list if all the 32 spiritual masters in our disciplic succession. Did anyone of them ever exhibit "illicit sex with men, women and possibly children as well"? Did anyone of them ever engage in any of the deviant activities listed above?
5) These "fallen guru" quotes given by the previous acaryas do not refer to the bona fide acaryas given in our disciplic succession, they refer to sahajiyas, caste goswamis, professional bhagavatam reciters, and other deviants who pose as vaishnavas, but not bona fide vaishnava acaryas.
6) The following is from "Our Living Guru". I respectfully suggest that you carefully read this booklet again and study it.
2.4) Q. But in the Vedic scriptures, don't we find examples of liberated souls who seem to display material conditioning?
A. Seeming and being are, of course, two different things. As we are aware, the Vedic scriptures sing of the liberated eternal preceptor guru's character, his spiritual purity.
One the other hand, the "living gurus," fallen early into embarrassing manifestations of material conditioning or impurity, have strained to explain it all away by singing of the eternal preceptor's alleged character lapses.
For example, in their August 1980 GBC report, in an attempt to explain some deviant behaviors of some of the "living gurus" their advocates alleged, "Even Bhishmadeva, who was one of the great Mahajanas or authorities in understanding Krishna consciousness, was affected by this materialistic association (of women and money). If even Bhishmadeva can be affected by materialistic association, then what to speak of ourselves?"
Lest we be misled, Srila Prabhupada certifies Bhishma's absolutely liberated status, "Sri Bhishmadeva is a great devotee of the Lord in the relation of servitorship (an eternally pure relationship with God)." (SB 1.9.34)
"As a Mahajana or authority he was on the level of Brahma, Narada and Shiva, although he was a human being. Qualification on a par with the great demigods is possible only by attainment of spiritual perfection." (SB 1.9.34)
The 1980 G.B.C. report continued: "There are examples in the Srimad Bhagavatam of great devotees having difficulties... Lord Brahma was affected by sex attraction for his daughter." (!)
But Srila Prabhupada establishes Lord Brahma's liberated and pure status: "This extraordinary immorality on the part of Lord Brahma was heard to have occurred in some particular kalpa (epoch), but it could not have happened in the kalpa in which Brahma heard directly from the Lord the four essential verses of Srimad Bhagavatam, because the Lord benedicted Brahma, after giving him lessons on the Bhagavatam, that he would never be bewildered in any kalpa whatsoever. This indicates that before the hearing of Srimad Bhagavatam he might have fallen victim to such sensuality, but after hearing Srimad Bhagavatam directly from the Lord there was no possibility of such failures." (SB 3.12.28)
When did Lord Brahma experience some apparent sex attraction? Before hearing the essential Bhagavatam verses. Yet the GBC failed entirely to mention that Lord Brahma's illusion had occurred before he heard the Bhagavatam verses. The GBC implies, quite unfairly, that Brahma's illusion occurred after he had heard the Bhagavatam and had become a liberated eternal preceptor guru.
Srila Prabhupada further explains, with brilliant clarity, the nature of Lord Brahma's position in a letter, dated 23rd of March 1969, to Himavati devi dasi: "There are many other stories also, but such apparent falling is without any influence to very, very advanced devotees. A neophyte should always be careful. One should not discuss about such great devotee's apparent fall-down. Just like one should not discuss about the sun who evaporates urine from the earth; it is possible for the sun to do it, and still remains the sun, but for ordinary man if he lives in a filthy place he will be infected. So Lord Shiva or Lord Brahma, they are highly elevated devotees, and we should not try to criticize about their behavior even though it appears against the rules.
"...So far Lord Brahma and his attraction for his daughter; this illustration should be taken by conditioned souls, that even a person like Brahma is sometimes victimized, how much careful we should be. Not that even Brahma was enticed, so we shall become enticed more and more. This is an example set for us by great devotees."
It is thus clear that a progressing candidate on the path of devotional service must use the greatest caution while analyzing the exalted position of Brahma and other Mahajanas.
The GBC also claimed about another exalted liberated devotee, "Dhruva maharaja became overwhelmed by anger at the yakshas for killing his brother."
Srila Prabhupada clarifies, "Dhruva Maharaja was a liberated soul, and actually he was not angry with anyone, but because he was a ruler, it was his duty to become angry for some time in order to keep the law and order of the state." (SB 4.11.13)
This "living guru" tactic of devaluing the great liberated devotees has continued in an expanding pattern throughout the years. For instance, the GBC's "living guru" author, who wrote the "Guru Reform Notebook" says on page 15, "On studying Dhruva Maharaja's case, I do not see at first how it applies to me and my GBC guru Godbrothers. We didn't pursue an obvious material desire as did Dhruva..." In short, the living guru author tries to paint the GBC's guru project, with all of it's odious degradations, sectarian violence, and so on, as somehow higher than a factual pure devotee.
Srila Prabhupada writes, "Dhruva Maharaja was a maha-bhagavata, or a first class pure devotee..." (SB 4.12.8)
"It is our duty to remember always that in comparison to Dhruva Maharaja, we are very insignificant. We cannot do anything like what Dhruva Maharaja did for self realization, because we are absolutely incompetent to execute such service." (SB 4.8.73)
And "By associating constantly with the Supreme Personality of Godhead in his heart, Dhruva Maharaja naturally became equal to the greatest, Brahman, by His association and thus he became the heaviest, and the entire universe trembled." (SB 4.8.78)
The 1980 G.B.C. report even chides Arjuna, for outright "losing sight of Krishna": "Arjuna had difficulties in the beginning of the battle of Kuruksetra, but it was due to his losing sight of Krishna, not because of his accepting a superior position to Krishna. It was Arjuna's duty to accept the Supreme Lord as his chariot driver in his fight against Duryodhana's forces. Similarly, it is the duty of ISKCON's initiating gurus to sit on their Vyasasanas (high seats meant for pure devotees) and defeat the ignorance of the age by their strong preaching. Some of our men may have difficulties, but their problems are due to their having lost sight of Krishna for the moment, not due to sitting on a Vyasasana." The GBC's rather boldly compare the abominable illicit activities manifest in the "living guru" project to the so-called illusions of Krishna's eternally pure associate.
As recently as 7 January 1990, while giving a Bhagavatam class, prior to a temple president's meeting on the so-called guru issue, a "living guru" based in east India, (also one of the coauthors of the August 1980 GBC report) alleged that sometimes, for a few minutes, great eternally liberated guru devotees such as Bhishma and Arjuna fall under Mahamaya, the Lord's deluding energy, which covers those who are envious of the Lord.
Yet Srila Prabhupada has very different things to say: "Arjuna conquered both sleep and ignorance because of his friendship with Krishna. As a great devotee of Krishna, Arjuna could not forget Krishna even for a moment, because that is the nature of a devotee. Either in waking or sleeping, a devotee of the Lord can never be free of thinking of Krishna's name, form, qualities, and pastimes. Thus a devotee of Krishna can conquer both sleep and ignorance simply by thinking of Krishna constantly. That is called Krishna consciousness." (Bhagavad-gita As It Is 1.24)
And Srila Prabhupada also writes of Arjuna, "His intelligence could not be polluted at any time, because he was a devotee and constant companion of the Lord, as is clear in the fourth chapter of Bhagavad-gita. Apparently Arjuna's intelligence became polluted because otherwise there would not have been a chance to deliver the teachings of Bhagavad Gita for the good of all polluted conditioned souls engaged in material bondage by the conception of the false material body..." (SB 1.9.36)
Srila Prabhupada further illuminates Arjuna's awesome liberated status: "Although Arjuna is with Krishna in innumerable different material universes at one time, still there is only one spirit soul who is Arjuna. This spiritual soul expands into many different bodies, and thus you can understand that there are also incarnations of devotees as well as incarnation of Krishna. This is the power of the spirit soul, that it is unlimited. Such conception cannot be understood while one is in the conditioned state." (Letter, 12 December 1968)
Further the concept that a pure devotee (fully realized) may forget Krishna, even for a moment, is not supported by Srila Prabhupada and the previous acharyas. "As indicated by the word satatam and nityasah, which mean 'always,' 'regularly,' or 'every day,' a pure devotee constantly remembers Krishna and meditates upon Him....A pure devotee cannot forget the Supreme Lord for a moment, and similarly the Supreme Lord cannot forget His pure devotee for a moment." (Bhagavad-gita As It Is 8.14)
The author of the "Guru Reform Notebook" (pages 24-25) alleges that great liberated gurus and even the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself may also be great offenders, while he stretches even further the attempts to "explain away" the many discrepancies manifested in the GBC's "living guru" project: "Examples of great persons who considered themselves great offenders:
1. Lord Balarama, after killing Romaharshana Suta.
2. Parasurama, after killing the kshatriyas.
3. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati, who refused to take mango, saying, 'No, I am an offender.'
4. Srila Prabhupada, who begged forgiveness in his last days for offending his Godbrothers.
5. Narottama dasa and Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who lament in their songs not exactly for having committed offenses, but for wasting their lives in material life."
And how do we know that the great, liberated eternal preceptor gurus never become materially conditioned? Because the Vedic literature and Prabhupada's personal example confirm it.
How do we know that the "living gurus" are conditioned souls unqualified to hold the post of eternal preceptor gurus? Because, as seen above, they exhibit conditioned defects. They incorrectly misinterpret the Vedic scriptures by their imperfect senses. Some of them even boast that Krishna's pure parampara gurus, such as the "living guru" project's members, "make mistakes all the time."
Then they amalgamate those conditioned defects into larger illusions which they forward as position papers, (GBC philosophical reports) and such illusions are supposed to be "the absolute truth." This means that they are then exhibiting the cheating propensity. Finally, as described above, they shamelessly and unauthorizedly promote all their material defects as the qualifications of the great acharyas and Mahajanas.
Very dangerously, the "living gurus" portray the completely Krishna conscious eternal preceptor gurus as faulty, materially affected, mixed devotees. So again, Srila Prabhupada observes the great danger of this deviant philosophy: mixing the contaminated with the pure in Cc. Adi-Lila 7.72: "thus they clear their path to hell."
Srila Prabhupada clarifies the reasons for the false criticisms towards real acharyas: "Influenced by an envious temperament and dissatisfied because of an attitude of sense gratification, mundaners criticize a real acharya. In fact, however, a bona fide acharya is nondifferent from the Personality of Godhead, and therefore to envy such an acharya is to envy the Personality of Godhead Himself. This will produce an effect subversive to transcendental realization..." (Cc. Adi 1.46)
And he remarks in Sri Isopanisad, Mantra twelve, of the potential consequences of misleading innocent people by falsely posing as an eternal guru, "By a false display of religious sentiments, they present a show of devotional service while indulging in all sorts of immoral activities. In this way they pass as spiritual masters and devotees of God. Such violators of religious principles have no respect for the authoritative acharyas, the holy teachers in the strict disciplic succession. To mislead the people in general, they themselves become so-called acharyas, but they do not even follow the principles of the acharyas.
"These rogues are the most dangerous elements in human society. Because there is no religious government, they escape punishment by the law of the state. They cannot however, escape the law of the Supreme, who has clearly stated in Bhagavad-gita (16. 19-20) that envious demons in the garb of religious propagandists shall be thrown into the darkest regions of hell. Sri Isopanisad confirms that these pseudo-religionists are headed toward the most obnoxious place in the universe after the completion of their spiritual master business, which they conduct simply for sense gratification."
Srila Prabhupada's spiritual master Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, warned, in 1916 in a book titled Prakrita rasa sata dushani. "Mahajana pathe dosa kabhu guru deya na. The genuine spiritual master never finds fault with the devotional path shown by the great devotees (mahajanas)." Further he states, "guru mahajana vakye bheda kabhu haya na. There can never be any difference between the explanations of the bona fide spiritual master and the teachings of the great devotees (mahajanas)."
Thus, several fundamental of pillars of "living guru" projects_since time immemorial_are: 1) That pure devotees forget Krishna, for a moment or longer. 2) That the Personality of Godhead, Lord Balarama, Parasurama, and so on, may have committed errors or may be considered as offenders. 3) The maha-bhagavata acharyas, even including Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura or Srila Prabhupada himself, may have made been in illusion, committed mistakes, misrepresented things or may have even been offenders. All of these conceptions, as verbalized by the GBCs, are considered as forbidden by Srila Prabhupada.
How about the issue of bad gurus?
2.12) Q. Let's not be overly idealistic. We need gurus, but inevitably, as recent history has shown, sometimes a reasonably good guru can become a bad guru. Isn't that right?
A. Srila Prabhupada: "Well, if he is bad, how can he become guru? (Laughter) How can iron become gold? Actually, a guru cannot be bad, for if someone is bad, he cannot be a guru. You cannot say 'bad guru.' That is a contradiction...
"A guru cannot be bad. There is no question of a bad guru, any more than a red guru or a white guru. Guru means 'genuine guru.'" (Science of Self-realization, "Saints and Swindlers")
Before 1977 in the presence of the bona fide guru, Srila Prabhupada there was no question of a "bad guru." Or if there was one, such a silly concoction would create about a shower of laughter. But now the "living guru" project has created thousands of unanswered questions about their "bad gurus." And no one is laughing. Indeed, the "living guru" project will have one shunned, excommunicated, even threatened for the "sin" of repeating Prabhupada's clear instruction "there is no question of a bad guru."
Srila Prabhupada explains the incident of Lord Brahma.
5.1) Q. In Prabhupada's guru succession, the Brahma-Madhava-Gaudiya sampradaya, do we find any examples of anyone with material contamination?
A. Absolutely not. Many would-be-gurus, especially within the "living guru" project, emphatically claim otherwise, possibly to downplay their own mistakes, illusions, cheating and various material contaminations. For instance, after incidents of drug taking and homosexuality, the post-1977 guru project claimed, in their August 1980 GBC report: "There are examples in the Srimad Bhagavatam of great devotees having difficulties. ...Lord Brahma was affected by sex attraction for his daughter."
This offensive attack on the parampara is a continued theme. The notion that "Krishna's pure guru successors are subject to contamination" has expanded in the "living guru" project. For example, a "living guru" based in eastern India, lectured in January 1990, that sometimes, for a few minutes, Krishna's great successor gurus, such as Lord Brahma, become bewildered by maha-maya (mundane illusion).
Who is that rascal? In a morning walk conversation recorded on 10 December 1975, in Vrindavana, Srila Prabhupada turns this claim on its head:
Disciple: I was recently told by one devotee that the acharya does not have to be a pure devotee.
Disciple: That the acharya does not have to be a pure devotee.
Prabhupada: Who is that rascal? Who said?. . . Who is that rascal? The acharya does not have to be a pure devotee?
Disciple: Nitai said it... He said that Lord Brahma is the acharya in the Brahma sampradaya, but yet he is sometimes afflicted by passion. So therefore he is saying that it appears that the acharya does not have to be a pure devotee...
Prabhupada: He manufactured his idea. Therefore he's a rascal. Therefore he's a rascal. Nitai has become an authority?
Disciple: No. Actually he said that he thought...
Prabhupada: He thought something rascaldom, and he is expressing that. Therefore he is more rascal. These things are going on. As soon as he reads some books, he becomes acharya, whatever rascal he may be. These things are to be seen in this way, that, 'Such an exalted person_he sometimes becomes passionate, so how much we shall be careful.' That is the instruction. It is not that the acharya has become passionate. Therefore I shall become passionate. I am strict follower of the acharya. These rascals say."
The "rascal" devotee mentioned above, who maintained that the parampara could be contaminated, was later banned entirely from ISKCON by Srila Prabhupada himself. This extreme action by Prabhupada was so rare, few devotees recall any other similar banishment.
Clearly, Srila Prabhupada saw the "contaminated succession" idea as extremely dangerous and insidious, yet this idea now forms one of the primary pillars of the "living guru" project's philosophy.
In a letter dated 13 February 1968, Srila Prabhupada lists Krishna's sampradaya, His cent-percent uncontaminated (guru) successors: "My guru maharaja was in the 10th generation from Lord Chaitanya. We are eleventh from Lord Chaitanya. The disciplic succession is as follows: 1. Sri Krishna, 2. Brahma, 3. Narada, 4. Vyasa, 5. Madhva,... 19. Madhavendra Puri, 20. Ishvara Puri, 21. Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, 22. (Swarupa, Sanatan) Rupa, 23. (Jiva) Raghunatha, 24. Krishna dasa, 25. Narottama, 26. Viswanatha, 27. (Baladeva) Jagannatha, 28. (Bhaktivinode) Gurakishore, 29. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, 30. Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta.
This letter may help you to undersand
Position of the bona fide spiritual master.
Srila Prabhupada letter, New Vrindaban, 10 June, 1969
London My Dear Mukunda,
Please accept my blessings. I thank you very much for your letter of June 3, 1969, and I have noted the contents carefully. Regarding Mataji Syamadevi's temple in Leicester, your version is all right, and I am not very interested to establish a Hindu temple. Perhaps you know from the very beginning I never described my movement as Hindu religion. Religion means the bona fide process by which we understand God and the first class religion is that which teaches people to develop love for God. To know or accept the authority of God is one thing, but to love God is another. Generally, people are interested in material comforts and they make God as the supplying agent. This kind of devotion is not purified. It is contaminated by material desires, but when one is elevated to the position of giving everything to God out of love and affection, that is the first class position. We are teaching this philosophy in the name of Krishna Consciousness, and it is applicable to all sober persons. The Bhagavat principle is that because we can be happy simply by developing our dormant love of God, this is our first business.
I understand that you have now three houses under consideration: two of them are immediately available, but one requires some money. Why don't you pay the money? What is the amount? If you are short of money and the house is very nice, then we can arrange for the money. You have stated that Mr. George Harrison will be seeing the Archbishop for granting us a church, and that is a very nice idea, but so far I see Mr. Harrison promised so many things which were not fulfilled practically. So instead of waiting for the church, if you can get one of the three houses now under consideration, that will be better. Your Sankirtana Movement is going on even with no house, so there is no cause of lamentation. You must go on with Sankirtana and selling our literature, never mind there is temple or not. I am very pleased that you have already sold 1,000 BTGs, and I assume that it will not be too difficult for you to sell 5,000 magazines. That will solve part of your financial problems.
The answer to your Istagosthi questions are as follows: Unless one is a resident of Krishna Loka, one cannot be a Spiritual Master. That is the first proposition. A layman cannot be a Spiritual Master, and if he becomes so then he will simply create disturbance. And who is a liberated person? One who knows Krishna. It is stated in BG, fourth chapter, anyone who knows Krishna in truth is immediately liberated, and after quitting the present body, he immediately goes to Krishna. That means he becomes a resident of Krishna Loka. As soon as one is liberated he is immediately a resident of Krishna Loka, and anyone who knows the truth of Krishna can become Spiritual Master. That is the version of Lord Caitanya. So to summarize the whole thing, it is to be understood that a bona fide Spiritual Master is a resident of Krishna Loka.
Your next question, whether the Spiritual Master was formerly a conditioned soul, actually a bona fide Spiritual Master is never a conditioned soul. There are three kinds of liberated persons. They are called 1) sadhan siddha, 2) kripa siddha, and 3) nitya siddha. Sadhan siddha means one who has attained perfection by executing the regulative principles of devotional service. Kripa siddha means one who has attained perfection by the special mercy of Krishna and the Spiritual Master, and nitya siddha means one who was never contaminated. The symptoms of nitya siddha is that from the beginning of his life he is attached to Krishna, and he is never tired of rendering service to Krishna. So we have to know what is what by these symptoms. But when one is actually on the siddha platform there is no such distinction as to who is sadhan, kripa, or nitya siddha. When one is siddha, there is no distinction what is what. Just like when the river water glides down to the Atlantic Ocean nobody can distinguish which portion was the Hudson River or some other river. Neither is there any necessity to make any such distinction. Actually, every living entity is eternally uncontaminated, although he may be in the material touch. This is the version of the Vedas. Asanga ayam purusha—the living entity is uncontaminated. Just like when there is a drop of oil in water you can immediately distinguish the oil from the water, and the water never mixes with the oil. Similarly, a living entity, although in material contact, is always distinct from the matter.
You are correct when you say that when the Spiritual Master speaks it should be taken that Krishna is speaking. That is a fact. A Spiritual Master must be liberated. It does not matter if he has come from Krishna Loka or he is liberated from here. But he must be liberated. The science of how one is liberated is explained above, but when one is liberated, there is no need of distinction whether he has come directly from Krishna Loka or from the material world. But in the broader sense everyone comes from Krishna Loka. When one forgets Krishna he is conditioned, when one remembers Krishna he is liberated. I hope this will clear up these points. I hope this will meet you in good health.
Your ever well-wisher,
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami
P.S. I am very much anxious to hear from Janaki why she does not write?
Yours in Srila Prabhupada's service
Subject: Guru falling down question
Dear ----------- prabhu,
Dandavat pranams. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
One friend of mine (disciple of RNS) sent me a document which has a section that 'gurus could fall down'. I was wondering if you could shed some light on this. It says the following :
The guru is a devotee serving as initiating and/or instructing spiritual master. There is no reason to believe that he or she cannot have problems. Srila Prabhupada explains: "A spiritual master must be very careful in this regard. Such business is going on all over the world. The spiritual master does not accept a materially opulent disciple just to advertise the fact that he has such a big disciple. He knows that by associating with such visayi disciples, he may fall down. One who accepts a visayi disciple is not a bona fide spiritual mas-ter. Even if he is, his position may be damaged due to association with an unscrupulous vitsayi."(Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 24.330p)
Similar references are available for liberated souls and maha-bhagavatas.
In fact, what to do when a guru falls down or has difficulties is explicitly discussed in the book Krishna bhajanamrita written by Srila Narahari Sarakara, a close associate of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. This important book was referred to by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura and its instructions form the basis of several ISKCON laws in regard to gurus’ falldowns, etc.
So guru fall down, though not common, is possible and has to be dealt with according to scriptural recommendations – not by rejecting the time-honoured guru system and resorting to the ritvika concoction.
Also there is another statement by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura in Sri Harinama Chintamani, as below :
by Thakura Bhaktivinoda
Sastha pariccheda: Gurvavagya Kon sthane guru tyaga korite haibe-
Now I will discuss the situation when one can give up one's spiritual master.
Tave jodi erupa ghatana kabhu haya.
Asatsange gurura jogyata haya ksaya..
It unfortunately happens sometimes that by bad association, the spiritual master looses his qualifications.
Prathame chilena tini sadguru-pradhana.
Pare nama-aparadhe haina hatagyana..
In the beginning when the guru gave initiation to the disciple, he was sadguru-pradhana or a very qualified bona-fide spiritual master but later due to get involved with the ten offenses, his knowledge was diminished.
Vaisnava vidvaya kori' chadi' nama-rasa.
Krame krame hana artha-kaminira basa..
He gave up relishing the chanting of the Holy Names due to his envy towards the Vaisnavas. Due to this he gradually came under the control of the desires for money and women.
Sei guru chadi' sisya Sri Krsnakrpaya.
Sadguru labhiya punah suddhanama gaya..
One should reject such guru and again accept an advanced bonafide spiritual master and thus again relish the pure chanting of the Holy Name.