Memories from April 25
A longtime friend of mine whose FB handle is Sri Sri wrote the following. He later changed "Steven Hawkins" to "Captain Kirk" since the idea of going "where no western gaudiya has gone before" and "to a different universe" etc., do indeed seem to be more appropriate to that. Anyway, I am certainly no intellectual giant, or perhaps it is that the Gaudiya Vaishnava world is unfortunately full of intellectual pygmies. Nevertheless, I have occasionally gotten positive feedback and I do think that there is some need of a cogent intellectual defense of religion in general and Vaishnavism in particular. I am totally inadequate to the task, but perhaps I have seen some glimpses of directions that such defenses could be made -- and they are not found in the direction of blind and literal belief. There are a few other reflections later in this post.
I thought this one was rather good though I changed the name to "The Prince" in the FB post. "Like leaves to theground." Written in 2007
Anybody who talks about love is a dreamer, an idealist. Sooner or later, such people have to confront reality and see if love stands.
jagadananda pabhu is the stephen hawkins of gaudiya vaishnavism......we all read him and have no idea what the hell he's talking about,,,,hawkins book the history of time was a best seller,,,i have never met anyone though who could expain hawkins ideas...or write an intelligible synonpsis of the book....the book must be read a dozen times with a dictionary.......hawkins of course is a very clever man....though .starting off with the wrong premise... he fools us into thinking he's fair minded...he definitely isn't... he has a mission to prove the non existence of a divine creator,,. he is a vehement antitheist... jagadananda prabhu's mission is entirely different of course... he's gone where no western gaudiya has gone before... into the sacred world of gaudiya literature which is only available for those who take the trouble to become fluent in classical bengali (advaita prabhu has also done this)... this untouched diamond mine of literature is literally beyond literal description... it's almost as if prabhu has gone to a different universe... and then come back... bear this in mind... when taking his darshan... he is a time traveller... and has seen the outer limits of our gaudiya universe... (2012)
2013
[These poems were posted in 2013 for some reason but were both written earlier and posted on this blog.]
I thought this one was rather good though I changed the name to "The Prince" in the FB post. "Like leaves to theground." Written in 2007
Ten offenses to love. Also written in 2006.
[So Sri Sri said that this post was a good example of "going where no one else would go." This produced a long thread with a lot of intelligent commentators chiming in. I have produced some of my comments, which have been somewhat edited. I should not that by synchronicity, some devotee posted a video clip of Bhagavan Das who said exactly what I was asking for, to the effect: "What could be more edifying that having sexual relations with a spiritually evolved partner? What could be better than that?" You can look him up.
Anyway, my thinking has evolved on these questions. Indeed I was joking that I may be close to achieving that geriatric asexuality that is sometimes confused with wisdom -- at least David Suzuki says that the diminution in testosterone levels is what makes it possible to become an "elder." Certainly one's perspective changes, though one may be able to recognize that dharmas differ with one's age -- that is the wisdom of the ashram system. Anyway... [Caveat: In some of these I seem to be playing devil's advocate...]
Anyway, my thinking has evolved on these questions. Indeed I was joking that I may be close to achieving that geriatric asexuality that is sometimes confused with wisdom -- at least David Suzuki says that the diminution in testosterone levels is what makes it possible to become an "elder." Certainly one's perspective changes, though one may be able to recognize that dharmas differ with one's age -- that is the wisdom of the ashram system. Anyway... [Caveat: In some of these I seem to be playing devil's advocate...]
2011
So how important is it if the guru uses his position to get sexual favors from his disciples? I would like to hear from people who think it is a POSITIVE thing, you know, having physical contact, giving sexual pleasure to the manifestation of God Himself ?
Intimate disciples, people close to these gurus -- no need to name names, there are too many -- are frequently complicit and enabling. It is very difficult to admit openly such behaviors in those to whom one feels spiritually indebted and in whom one has invested so much faith and personal commitment.
But some have even gone further to privately say openly, yes this is grace. Is that what these disciples believe?
Sexual abuse of women and children is something that is fairly recent in terms of popular discourse. There is no reason to think it has always been considered with such great horror in India. Shiva himself is an "erotic ascetic".
My question is, though, for those women and young men, etc., who have acquiesced to the sexual advances of so-called God-men, how many felt "divine" or even simple physical pleasure? I really would like to know.
Those who have spoken out are those who were disgusted. Of those who remained silent, how many felt truly that they were blessed?
I want to know if there is anyone who had sexual relations with these gurus and avataras who is willing to say openly that this really was his (or her) prasad, his grace, his "prema-dan" or what have you and that it has had long time positive benefits for their spiritual life.
The other question is: Does or does not the sexual abuse (it is always sexual abuse when one partner is not free to make a choice due to physical or moral pressure) outweigh the "good deeds" that a person may perform?
People turn a blind eye to various misdeeds, even murder, if a person is powerful. Such people -- even big criminals -- die and leave behind schools and hospitals, temples and other socially beneficial institutions that glow with their fame for eternity. And what are the few accusations of disrepute that are flung into the breeze by lesser mortals? Soon forgotten...
And even if true, do not these good works outweigh the few individual cases of minor psychological discomfort to those chosen for brief sexual encounters? Or who have suffered even worse crimes?
After all, even about Krishna it says that one should not imitate if we are not "capable" (anīśvara). So if you can get away with it, it is OK? In the world of realpolitik, we know that our political leaders are often complicit in ugly business and yet we go on supporting or voting for them. Is this any different?
Yet, it appears that behind it all, the truth is that there was some serious personal psychological defect in these people. Can the good works they engaged their followers in bring genuine or ultimate good to them, or indeed to anyone?
Intimate disciples, people close to these gurus -- no need to name names, there are too many -- are frequently complicit and enabling. It is very difficult to admit openly such behaviors in those to whom one feels spiritually indebted and in whom one has invested so much faith and personal commitment.
But some have even gone further to privately say openly, yes this is grace. Is that what these disciples believe?
Sexual abuse of women and children is something that is fairly recent in terms of popular discourse. There is no reason to think it has always been considered with such great horror in India. Shiva himself is an "erotic ascetic".
My question is, though, for those women and young men, etc., who have acquiesced to the sexual advances of so-called God-men, how many felt "divine" or even simple physical pleasure? I really would like to know.
Those who have spoken out are those who were disgusted. Of those who remained silent, how many felt truly that they were blessed?
I want to know if there is anyone who had sexual relations with these gurus and avataras who is willing to say openly that this really was his (or her) prasad, his grace, his "prema-dan" or what have you and that it has had long time positive benefits for their spiritual life.
The other question is: Does or does not the sexual abuse (it is always sexual abuse when one partner is not free to make a choice due to physical or moral pressure) outweigh the "good deeds" that a person may perform?
People turn a blind eye to various misdeeds, even murder, if a person is powerful. Such people -- even big criminals -- die and leave behind schools and hospitals, temples and other socially beneficial institutions that glow with their fame for eternity. And what are the few accusations of disrepute that are flung into the breeze by lesser mortals? Soon forgotten...
And even if true, do not these good works outweigh the few individual cases of minor psychological discomfort to those chosen for brief sexual encounters? Or who have suffered even worse crimes?
After all, even about Krishna it says that one should not imitate if we are not "capable" (anīśvara). So if you can get away with it, it is OK? In the world of realpolitik, we know that our political leaders are often complicit in ugly business and yet we go on supporting or voting for them. Is this any different?
Yet, it appears that behind it all, the truth is that there was some serious personal psychological defect in these people. Can the good works they engaged their followers in bring genuine or ultimate good to them, or indeed to anyone?
[I have come to calling this a defect in the DNA of the succession that follows. Better to have a straightforward and open belief about such things rather than hypocrisy.]
Here is a typical quote: "We have found it extremely interesting how many people have judged this person as real or a fraud based on /.../, instead of the merits of his effectiveness as an educator and activist for the poor.
"Getting the government to bring free water to areas where water is more expensive than petrol and out of reach of the poor, as he has, has far more weight for us ... It's important to remember what's more important to a starving child."
"Getting the government to bring free water to areas where water is more expensive than petrol and out of reach of the poor, as he has, has far more weight for us ... It's important to remember what's more important to a starving child."
What gets me is the furtive and impersonal sexuality of ALL these gurus who engage in sex with disciples, etc.
[I believe that all this was written around the same time I was writing my article on Kripalu Maharaj. I have to confess that I have been listening to Kripalu's Hindi lectures quite a bit lately and for all of the scandals I have to admit to being quite impressed by his capacity as a speaker. A lot of the comments here are influenced by reflections on him, but of course he is not the only one.]
It is the "touch of the divine being" that is somehow sufficient, and the disciples take it as a manifestation of "love" that is bewildering at best. But how can this be love without the profound intimacy that is the real locus of the sacred?
And then the coverups, which become an uncomfortable necessity mean that the ashrams of these gurus become vitiated with an undercurrent of falsity, like the worst repressive state, all in the name of preserving the "good works" that such a person has set into motion.
But yes, their "good works" ultimately preserve a hypocritical status quo that no one has the guts to challenge.
And these repeated acts of sexual misconduct by so many of the top gurus of Hinduism to me is the primary testimonial of a hypocritical attitude to sexuality that needs to be faced honestly and squarely.
It is the "touch of the divine being" that is somehow sufficient, and the disciples take it as a manifestation of "love" that is bewildering at best. But how can this be love without the profound intimacy that is the real locus of the sacred?
And then the coverups, which become an uncomfortable necessity mean that the ashrams of these gurus become vitiated with an undercurrent of falsity, like the worst repressive state, all in the name of preserving the "good works" that such a person has set into motion.
But yes, their "good works" ultimately preserve a hypocritical status quo that no one has the guts to challenge.
And these repeated acts of sexual misconduct by so many of the top gurus of Hinduism to me is the primary testimonial of a hypocritical attitude to sexuality that needs to be faced honestly and squarely.
The "behavior of the siddha is the practice of the sadhaka." If the behaviors of the siddhas are not replicable as sadhanas, then we must inquire into why.
If there is a positive aspect to it [as intimated by some apologists for people like Kripalu], one has to ask why so few disciples are willing to come forth and say, "Yes, I had such and such a sexual experience with my guru. And this was an extraordinary spiritual experience and only the most fortunate have this opportunity," etc.
Instead we have one law of celibacy, and another law of licentiousness?
My principal point though is what I made in my post of 10 minutes ago, which is that I think that sex and love are related, and simple sexual relief through furtive trysts with cowering or gullible disciples does not match my conception of how that relation works.
Sexuality is a door to the sacred, but the sacred dwells in the profundity of the love that is entered into through the sadhana of the relationship. Sadhana means a lot more than the so-called "prema-dana".
And then the coverups, which become an uncomfortable necessity mean that the ashrams of these gurus become vitiated with an undercurrent of falsity, like the worst repressive state, all in the name of preserving the "good works" that such a person has set into motion.
But yes, their "good works" ultimately preserve a hypocritical status quo that no one has the guts to challenge.
And these repeated acts of sexual misconduct by so many of the top gurus of Hinduism to me is the primary testimonial of a hypocritical attitude to sexuality that needs to be faced honestly and squarely.
2011
prajñā-prasādam āruhya aśocyaḥ śocato jānan |
bhūmiṣṭhān iva śailasthaḥ sarvān prājño’nupaśyati ||
The verse is found in Vyasa's commentary to the YS 1.47. The exact source hasn't been found, but there are several (5) variants on it, all in the Shanti Parva of MBh. There is also a Pali version in the Dhammapada.
pamādam appamādena yadā nudati paṇḍito
paññā-pāsādam āruyha asoko sokinīm pajām
pabbataṭṭho va bhummaṭṭhe dhīro bāle avekkhati
One thing is that all the variants read prāsādam instead of prasādam. But since the sūtra is about prasāda, that appears to be Vyasa's intention.
These are Swami Veda Bharati's translations by the way.
If there is a positive aspect to it [as intimated by some apologists for people like Kripalu], one has to ask why so few disciples are willing to come forth and say, "Yes, I had such and such a sexual experience with my guru. And this was an extraordinary spiritual experience and only the most fortunate have this opportunity," etc.
Instead we have one law of celibacy, and another law of licentiousness?
My principal point though is what I made in my post of 10 minutes ago, which is that I think that sex and love are related, and simple sexual relief through furtive trysts with cowering or gullible disciples does not match my conception of how that relation works.
Sexuality is a door to the sacred, but the sacred dwells in the profundity of the love that is entered into through the sadhana of the relationship. Sadhana means a lot more than the so-called "prema-dana".
And then the coverups, which become an uncomfortable necessity mean that the ashrams of these gurus become vitiated with an undercurrent of falsity, like the worst repressive state, all in the name of preserving the "good works" that such a person has set into motion.
But yes, their "good works" ultimately preserve a hypocritical status quo that no one has the guts to challenge.
And these repeated acts of sexual misconduct by so many of the top gurus of Hinduism to me is the primary testimonial of a hypocritical attitude to sexuality that needs to be faced honestly and squarely.
2011
bhūmiṣṭhān iva śailasthaḥ sarvān prājño’nupaśyati ||
The verse is found in Vyasa's commentary to the YS 1.47. The exact source hasn't been found, but there are several (5) variants on it, all in the Shanti Parva of MBh. There is also a Pali version in the Dhammapada.
paññā-pāsādam āruyha asoko sokinīm pajām
pabbataṭṭho va bhummaṭṭhe dhīro bāle avekkhati
When the wise man (paṇḍita) dispels negligence with attentiveness,
Having climbed up the palace of wisdom,
Griefless, sapient, he looks at the nescient, grieving crowd
Like one on a mountain [top] who views those on the ground [below].
Having climbed up the palace of wisdom,
Griefless, sapient, he looks at the nescient, grieving crowd
Like one on a mountain [top] who views those on the ground [below].
One thing is that all the variants read prāsādam instead of prasādam. But since the sūtra is about prasāda, that appears to be Vyasa's intention.
These are Swami Veda Bharati's translations by the way.
Comments