Jagat

In the FB discussions that followed the posting of Sex and Bhakti Yoga, parts I and II , many objections were presented, some of which I responded to and have since cross-posted to this blog, often with corrections, elaborations, and embellishments. This was partly possible due to my being in Rishikesh where I have been for the last two weeks having a good meditation refresher, sitting for three or four hours a day. I like the ashram lifestyle. This ashram is pretty loose in its discipline, but still I like the framework of a sattvika spiritual community. I have been giving one class a day on "Bhakti, rasa and psychology," trying to find ways of communicating my ideas to a group of yogis. Because my philosophy is a bit of a hybrid, as the title of the lectures itself indicates, what is accessible to one audience is outside the realm of comprehension for others. Looking back on the two weeks I see that (as one of the students actually told me) I am usually trying to ...

I would like to thank the friend who has sent me the following quotes from Bhaktivinoda Thakur's writings and, being concerned about the spread of Sahajiyaism, asked how I would respond. In view of my initiation into the disciplic line of Bhaktivinoda Thakur through his son Lalita Prasad Thakur, my friend finds it strange that I should be promoting Sahajiya ideas and wonders where I got them from. I have previously explained that I did not get them from my dīkṣā guru, but later through my own inspiration, through the grace of the Inner Guru, and from a śikṣā line. As the following quotes show, this would not have met with Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur's approval, nor in all likelihood that of Lalita Prasad Thakur, nor indeed of any of the orthodox Vaishnavas who follow the rāgānugā path in Braj or Gauda Mandal. Although I continue to bow down to all of these mahātmās, by whose grace I have made some small progress in spiritual life and indeed by whose grace I have come to ...

Ultimately all Krishna devotees will have to give up the literal interpretation of myth and turn to a symbolic understanding, or their faith will collapse on its own contradictions. The reason a Gaudiya Vaishnava cannot be a literalist is because a literalist is always an unconscious dualist. As with all seekers of Truth, we hold that "when one's ultimate concerns are relative truths, that is called idolatry." (Paul Tillich) In other words, it is misplaced and misguided faith. The literalist may appear to be unitarian who has resolved the problem of duality, but in fact he has a big unacknowledged Jungian "Shadow". Therefore his views are unsynthesized. This is why I say his position will ultimately collapse on its own contradictions. We are acintya-bhedābheda-vādis . Acintya means paradox or mystery. Acintya-bhedābheda is not about artificially throwing up one's hands and saying, "It is all one anyway!" it is about the experiential and con...

In literature, it is in the nature of the text itself to control the emotional responses. (Under this rubric or the word "literature," I include plays, movies, musical works, novels, poems, etc.; in short, anything where the kinds of dynamics under discussion are operative.)  And here we must draw a distinction between Rupa's divine aesthetic and that of other, "mundane" literature. In the latter, most audiences tend to seek entertainment that confirms their ("bodily") identities, and therefore young men like action flicks with themes that allow them to experience vicarious heroism and a macho kind of love. For them, identification with the young girl mentioned previously will be difficult and somewhat forced. In such a case, a certain amount of acculturation or education is required, principally in the acquisition of a predisposition or capacity to bring one's attention to bear on the text material ( sattva-guna ). A little bit of work is require...