Jagat

In Christianity, one cultivates the sense of being a sinner through constant, ever more subtle self-examination. The purpose of this is to see one's own utter incapacity of attaining salvation from the material conditioning and to thus take complete shelter of the Lord. Ammachi's bhaktas say she became blue like Krishna in Vrindavan. She came to Vineet Narain's place right next door to Jiva on this date 2016. Big event. Big crowd. She did not come alone. My crappy picture.

...one may misconstrue that the grace of devotees is motivated by seeing the suffering of someone. This would mean that bhakti can be caused by something material. This however goes against the principle that bhakti is untouched by anything material. ...  Bhagavān does not control the will of His devotees. Thus it cannot be said that their grace is controlled by Bhagavān. Bhagavān himself is under the control of devotees. Such is the play of love that the Controller Himself becomes controlled and vice versa. Anuccheda 181 : Devotees Give Grace by Their Own Free Will ततः सत्सङ्गहेतुश्च सतां स्वैरचारितैव, नान्यः। यथाह (भा. ११.२.२४)— त एकदा निमेः सत्रमुपजग्मुर्यदृच्छया। ते नवयोगेश्वरा यदृच्छया स्वैरतया, न तु हेत्वन्तरप्रयुक्ततयेत्यर्थः। यदृच्छा स्वैरिता इत्यमरः। Nothing other than the independent will of saints can be the cause of sat-saṅga , as Śrī Nārada said: Once they unexpectedly arrived at the sacrificial arena of King Nimi. (SB 11.2.24) "They...

The big question asked in this anuccheda is the role of Krishna himself in giving mercy. Is it primary or secondary to the will or grace of a devotee? Again, please note that this is not the final version, as other editors will go through this and make further changes. (Jagat) Anuccheda 180 Bhakti Comes b y t he Grace of a Devotee ततः सत्सङ्गस्यैव तत्र निदानत्वं सिद्धम्। तच्च युक्तम्, अनादिसिद्धतज्ज्ञानमयतद्वैमुख्यवतामन्यथा हि तदसम्भवः। तदुक्तम्— It has thus been established that the association of saints is the determinant cause of devotion, and this is certainly proper. Otherwise, indifference to Bhagavān, caused by beginningless ignorance, is impossible to remedy. तर्कोऽप्रतिष्ठः श्रुतयो विभिन्ना नासावृषिर्यस्य मतं न भिन्नम्। धर्मस्य तत्त्वं निहितं गुहायां महाजनो येन गतः स पन्थाः॥ (म.भा. ३.३१३.११७) For this reason it is said in the Mahābhārata : Logic has no ultimate foundation. The scriptures express divergent viewpoints. One cannot be known as a see...

I was listening to some devout Christian fundamentalist thoughts of "revival" and was struck by one dominant thought that pervaded the discourse. It might be said to be the essence of the sadhana this particular sect proposes. In Christianity, one cultivates the sense of being a sinner through constant, ever more subtle self-examination. The purpose of this is to see one's own utter incapacity of attaining salvation from the material condition and to thus to take complete shelter of the Lord. Humility is this awareness. If we encourage the person who attempts to express humility by telling him, "you are not a sinner", we are actually not doing him a favor. Because as soon as his ego is flattered, he ceases to take shelter in submission to the Lord. So.... The correct thing to do is say, "Take shelter. You are on the right road. Look at yourself and see how, as a conditioned soul, you have no other recourse than to give yourself up utterly to your i...

The third chapter of the Bhajana Rahasya is based on the tṛṇād api sunīcena verse. To elaborate on this verse, Bhaktivinode Thakur depends on Mukunda-mālā and Stotra-ratna , two hymns from the Sri Vaishnava tradition predating Ramanuja. Bhaktivinoda had translated many of these verses in his Gīta-mālā and he reuses those same translations here. In view of the discussions of karma related to child abuse and so on, these verses may cause a bit of discomfort. Actually to think oneself a sinner, a fallen creature -- this goes against the militant humanism of our "enlightened" period of human civilization. Certainly, one of the principal criticisms against cults is that they force-feed teachings that are meant to vitiate a person's self-esteem and thus make him more malleable by the "authorities." In a traditional society, where the leaders themselves would have been trained in humility, and where they bowed down to sages who were completely disinterested ...

Gītā catuḥ-ślokī 4 || 10.11 || तेषामेवानुकम्पार्थमहमज्ञानजं तमः। नाशयाम्यात्मभावस्थो ज्ञानदीपेन भास्वता॥ teṣām evānukampārtham aham ajñāna-jaṁ tamaḥ | nāśayāmy ātma-bhāva-stho jñāna-dīpena bhāsvatā || ahaṁ anukampārthaṁ teṣām ātma-bhāva-sthaḥ, (teṣām) ajñāna-jaṁ tamaḥ jñāna-dīpena bhāsvatā nāśayāmi. ·          anukampā = (f) mercy, compassion. dayā. ·          anukampārthaṁ = (adv.) add ārthaṁ in compound to another word and that shows the purpose. “for the sake of” dayā-hetoḥ. ·          ajñāna-jam = (adj.) “born of ignorance.” – ja is a suffix you can add to any word to make “arising from, born of.” ·          tam as = (n.) darkness. In sandhi, tamo . ·          nāśayāmi = “I destroy, I cause destruction.” (causative of √ naś, naśyati ) ...

Viktor Frankl meaning article . Human beings make the mistake, you could call it the “romantic fallacy,” that there is something called love, which when one falls into, everything will be complete and one is spiritually fulfilled. That is precisely why it is called a puruṣārtha of kāma , because it carries with it this illusion of completion. In a film, one sees the lovers kiss in the train station, all obstacles have been removed, and they live happily ever after. That is clearly a fallacy. A similar fallacy exists in spiritual life: it is the liberation fallacy, it is the idea of any kind of perfection in stasis, whether called nirvana or mukti or prema. It doesn't matter what we call it, if we identify it as the absolute cessation of suffering, a stasis, then it is fundamentally a fallacy. It is not bhakti, it is not reality. That is why bhakti theologians object to it. Both kāma or mukti are dreams of a state of being that is complete plenitude. Similarly, the other pu...

I can't help but get the feeling that a lot of people are going, "What on earth is he on about? What do Freud and Jung and all the rest of it have to do with Krishna consciousness? Didn't our acharyas already give us a foolproof and time-tested method for attaining Krishna consciousness? What does all this have to do with that?"