Tattva-viveka
the dust does not forgive
Brahma Dasa - October 21, 2004 9:48 pm
The Vaishnava forgives but the dust of his lotus feet does not???
Has anyone on tattva-viveka ever read this anywhere in Srila Prabhupada's writings? Or heard it in a class? If you heard it in class what was the context? /Brahma
Sanga Question via Website:
What does it mean that the Vaishnava forgives but the dust of his lotus feet does not? And is there any difference for the offender?
Dear *******,
I don't remember hearing this particular analogy and it doesn't seem exactly
right to me, so send me a reference as to where this can be found in
Vaisnava literature before I send your question to Swami Tripurari for his
comments.
Otherwise, Sri guru is considered 'the Vaisnava' and his servants
can be considered the dust of his lotus feet. This follows verse 3 of
siksastakam where Mahaprabhu begs to be accepted as a particle of dust at
the lotus feet of Sri Krsna--krpaya tava pada-pankaja.
Sri guru is merciful to all that approach him or her with sincerity, even if
those persons had previously been offenders like Jagai and Madhai. As the
guru is merciful and forgiving it behooves the disciples to reflect his mood
of forgiveness and bear not any grudge against those who might once have
been offenders. If offenders remain unapologetic then Sri Guru by virtue of
his spiritual advancement will forgive them anyway but this might be much
more difficult to do for his disciples, who are always affectionately looking after the
interests of Sri guru. So in this sense, the dust of his lotus feet (the
disciples) may not be as forgiving as Sri guru but this does not always
reflect well on those disciples because hardheartedness, bearing a grudge,
and so forth are not signs of spiritual advancement. As they say--hate the
sin and not the sinner. Overall, the best idea is to avoid offenders and try
not to bear them any ill will.
I hope this is helpful, sangaeditor
Dear Sangaeditor,
Thank you very much for your answer. My heart is satisfied by it. In general your approach (Brahma Prabhu?) (the whole group anyway) is very healing. As far as the reference, all I can say is that "I read it somewhere in Prabhupada's books" and heard it from devotees in class or otherwise now and then, but it's been a long time... A possible context is the story of Maharaja Ambarish and Durvasa Muni. The king took no offense, but the yogi definitely had it coming. So... if this info will bring out more nectar of spiritual understanding coming my way from your good self, I will be very happy. But if it sheds no further light on the subject, I leave it in the Lord's hands to enlighten me when- and however he sees fit, in the course of my wanderings throughout the universe... Hari Bol, *******
Dear *******
Thanks for your kind words. I am happy that my reply was helpful.
I did a search of Prabhupada's Vedabase and could not find the quotation as you had written it. (The Vaishnava forgives but the dust of his lotus feet does not?) As near as I could find to what you cited was this from his Srimad Bhagavatam. "A great soul may forgive offenses, but Krsna does not excuse offenses to the dust of that great soul’s feet." I checked books, conversations, lectures, and letters but could not find anything remotely saying that the dust of a Vaisnava's lotus feet does not forgive offenses. I could be wrong but I suspect that what you cited was an interpretation of this Bhagavatam verse and purport. I could be paranoid as well, but having had a lot of experience with this sort of thing I suspect that what you heard from devotees in class might have been a sectarian interpretation at that. Anyway here is what I found:
TRANSLATION: It is not wonderful for persons who have accepted the transient material body as the self to engage always in deriding great souls. Such envy on the part of materialistic persons is very good because that is the way they fall down. They are diminished by the dust of the feet of great personalities. SB 4.4.13
PURPORT: "Everything depends on the strength of the recipient. For example, due to the scorching sunshine many vegetables and flowers dry up, and many grow luxuriantly. Thus it is the recipient that causes growth and dwindling. Similarly, mahéyasäà päda-rajo-’bhiñekam: the dust of the lotus feet of great personalities offers all good to the recipient, but the same dust can also do harm. Those who are offenders at the lotus feet of a great personality dry up; their godly qualities diminish. A great soul may forgive offenses, but Krsna does not excuse offenses to the dust of that great soul’s feet, just as one can tolerate the scorching sunshine on one’s head but cannot tolerate the scorching sunshine on one’s feet. An offender glides down more and more; therefore he naturally continues to commit offenses at the feet of the great soul. Offenses are generally committed by persons who falsely identify with the impermanent body. King Dakña was deeply engrossed in a misconception because he identified the body with the soul. He offended the lotus feet of Lord Siva because he thought that his body, being the father of the body of Saté, was superior to Lord Siva’s. Generally, less intelligent men misidentify in that way, and they act in the bodily concept of life. Thus they are subject to commit more and more offenses at the lotus feet of great souls. One who has such a concept of life is considered to be in the class of animals like cows and asses."
In this Bhagavatam lecture of April 18, 1975 Srila Prabhupada refers to Bhagavatam verse 7.5. 32 again (mahéyasäà päda-rajo-’bhiñekam) saying that if one surrenders to the dust of the lotus feet of a devotee all problems will be solved.
"They cannot take to Krsna consciousness unless they bow down to the dust of His devotee, to the dust of the lotus feet of... Mahéyasäà päda-rajo ’bhiñekam. Päda-rajaù. Päda-rajaù means the dust at the lotus feet of mahéyasäm, the exalted devotee, niñkiïcanänäm, who has nothing to do with the material world. Niñkiïcanänäà na våëéta yävat. So long one does not take the dust of the lotus feet of Krsna’s devotee, he cannot surrender to Krsna. That is not possible. Therefore it is the duty of the devotees to go from place to place and just give the chance to the people to take to Krsna consciousness. Then their all problems will be solve".
To me "all problems will be solved" indicates that even the dust of his lotus feet will forgive an offender if that person surrenders to the Vaisnava. How could the dust remain unforgiving if both Krsna and the Vaisnava have forgiven the previous offender, who has now surrendered to the Vaisnava? So unless I receive further information I will have to conclude that what you believed was a quotation from Srila Prabhupada (The Vaishnava forgives but the dust of his lotus feet does not.) is but a particular interpretation, one that I don’t feel is quite correct.
All the best, Brahma
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - October 21, 2004 11:26 pm
SB 4.4.13 - PurportThose who are offenders at the lotus feet of a great personality dry up; their godly qualities diminish. A great soul may forgive offenses, but Krsna does not excuse offenses to the dust of that great soul's feet, just as one can tolerate the scorching sunshine on one's head but cannot tolerate the scorching sunshine on one's feet.
Back to Godhead Magazine #37-04, Begging ForgivenessIf despite our best efforts to cultivate respect and admiration for devotees of the Lord we instead offend them, we should lament, fall at their feet, and satisfy them with praise and respect. We should serve any unforgiving devotee for many days. If he or she continues to be angry with us, we should spend our time constantly chanting Krsna's holy name.
It is important to fall at the feet of a devotee we’ve offended, even if that devotee has no quarrel with our words, thoughts, or behavior. Such humble dealings will purify us and please Krsna, who is much more unhappy with an offense to His devotees than to Himself. It is said that without falling at the devotee’s feet, the devotee may forgive but the dust of his or her feet will hold one accountable. Performing a physical act of repentance when asking for forgiveness shows great humility and sincerity.
Just as Krsna is the heartfelt friend of all living beings, one who wants to be His devotee should be a vehicle for revealing that friendship. A lover of God should love everyone who loves God. As we deal with Krsna’s devotees with reverence, the holy name will gradually show His full power. Then chanting Hare Krsna will bring us to spiritual health, and we will know that there is nothing greater than the name, anywhere or at any time.
Brahma Dasa - October 22, 2004 6:57 pm
Thanks for the excerpt from BTG. In that article the author (Urmila dd) uses “It is said” before her statement that the devotee may forgive but the dust will hold one accountable. In religious writing “It is said” is used quite a lot. Generally ‘it is said’ is used to indicate that an idea has been commonly accepted even though a scriptural reference has not been cited. For example I could say---It is said in the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God. I might not know chapter and verse but I know that--it is said somewhere in the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God.
‘That the dust does not forgive’--seems to be a common thing to say in Iskcon so I would like to know if there is an actual pramana for that statement. I feel that this idea comes from the aforementioned Bhagavatam verse and purport but those words are not actually stated there.
In our theology the idea is well developed that offenses to a Vaisnava are very serious and to be forgiven for them one must approach the Vaisnava and rectify them in some way. Prabhupada says in this purport that an offense leads to more offenses which in turn cause one to fall lower and lower until ones spiritual good sense and merit is diminished or lost. This happens, but not in every case. For example I know of many instances where devotees who had been extremely negative and verbal against Sridhara Maharaja suddenly, as if hit by a bolt of lightning, had a change of heart. Actually this seems to happen even more now a days. Sridhara Maharaja is gone now so such devotees could ask forgiveness of his representatives or short of that they could just go on in Krsna consciousness in a spirit of change--remorseful of their past words and attitude toward Sridhara Maharaja.
But what gets me here is the idea that “the dust will not forgive”. For some reason this idea is intolerable to me. If ones attitude has changed and the offense is rectified why won’t the dust forgive? Am I missing something here? Perhaps Iskcon posits it own underlying meaning to this statement. Any insight?
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - October 22, 2004 7:23 pm
But what gets me here is the idea that “the dust will not forgive”. For some reason this idea is intolerable to me.
I completely agree. I think that cause of this misconception is a change of the original thought “Krsna does not excuse offenses to the dust of that great soul's feet” to “Dust will hold one accountable.” It’s Krsna, not dust will hold one accountable.
One who thinks himself lower than the grass, who is more tolerant than a tree, and who does not expect personal honor yet is always prepared to give all respect to others can very easily always chant the holy name of the Lord. (Adi 17.31)
Devotee (or dust) must be very forgiving so he cannot hold a grudge.
Babhru Das - October 22, 2004 8:04 pm
The "dust" is a figure of speech. The metaphor emphasizes the importance of seeking out the sadhu whom we have offended and falling at his or her feet, humbly begging forgiveness. In the scriptural examples that illustrate this point, we see that this is the only way to become free of the consequences of sadhu ninda. Durvasa was told that he must fall at Ambarisha's feet; Saci was told by Mahaprabhu that she must take the dust from Advaita's feet; Gopal had to fall at Srivasa Thakura's feet. It's not literally the dust that won't forgive; literally, it's the Lord. But figuratively, we may say that unless you take the dust from the offended party's feet, that dust will hold a grudge. The act of falling at the other's feet would certainly indicate the change of heart. In the case of someone no longer physically available, as is the case with Srila Sridhar Maharaja, perhaps the honest contrition satisfies the Lord.
In fact, none of the offended parties took offense. But the Lord was pretty hacked off.
The only other place I've found this expression so far is in an article by Niranjana Maharaja on the Web. His attribution is vague in the same way as Urmila's.
Brahma Dasa - October 22, 2004 10:05 pm
Yes, dust is a figure of speech. Sridhara Maharaja said that taking the dust of the lotus feet was not really about touching a sadhu’s feet but in the deepest sense meant associating with the sadhu, hearing from him, serving him etc. However, when I read this for the fist time ‘the Vaisnava will forgive but the dust of his lotus feet will not’ I felt that there was something else (besides the usual interpretation) behind the wording of that metaphor, something that’s not at all acceptable.
Perhaps my experience of Iskcon coupled with the fact that the details of this particular metaphor seem to be unique to Iskcon makes me unduly suspicious. Why do I see this statement (the Vaisnava will forgive but the dust of his lotus feet will not) as political propaganda. Am I just paranoid?
Any comments from anyone who is still more or less in Iskcon?
Swami - October 22, 2004 11:41 pm
This idea comes from SB 4.4.13. Nandatanuja dasa has cited Srila Prabhupada’s commentary. Here is what the verse says.
näscaryam etad yad asatsu sarvadä
mahad-vinindä kunapätma-vädisu
sersyam mahäpürusa-päda-pämsubhir
nirasta-tejahsu tad eva sobhanam
“It is not out of the ordinary for evil persons who always think of the transient material body as the self to regularly deride great souls. Appropriately such envy on the part of materialistic persons causes them to become diminished in stature by the influence of the dust of the feet of great personalities (mahapurusa-pada-pamsubhir).”
Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura draws upon this verse in his Madhurya Kadambini. Therein he discusses sadhu ninda (blaspheming devotees) in relation to anarthas arising from offenses to Nama Prabhu. The Thakura explains that maha bhagavatas do not take offense. However, should one who has offended a maha bhagavata think that because of this fact an offender does not need to approach the maha bhagavata’s feet for forgiveness, one should think again. Why? Because although maha bhagavatas do not take offense, the dust of their feet does hold offenders accountable. Thus the spirit behind this statement is that one who has offended a great soul must approach that soul for forgiveness. Don’t think otherwise.
My realization is as follows:
Certainly the Lord takes offense. Why then is the dust mentioned? What is the dust? The Lord is not the dust at the feet of his devotees. Although he would like to be, they will never allow this. This dust represents the servants of the maha bhagavata who are fulfilling the Lord’s most cherished desire to serve his dear devotees. Although his great devotees will never take service from the Lord, they mercifully accept service from others on his behalf and in doing so their bodily necessities, etc. are met. Thus it is through these servants of the devotees that the Lord’s desire to see his devotees personally served is fulfilled. In this sense the Lord is present in these servants, and when they take offense it also indicates that the Lord does.
The context in which the the Bhagavata verse under discussion was spoken involves Daksa's offence to Siva. It was Sati, the wife and disciple of Siva, who took offense when her husband (a maha bhagavata) was offended by her father, Daksa.
Babhru wondered what an offender should do if the offended sadhu has left the world and the offender had not taken steps to rectify the situation. The answer is that one must approach his or her representative.
Babhru Das - October 23, 2004 12:15 am
Perhaps my experience of Iskcon coupled with the fact that the details of this particular metaphor seem to be unique to Iskcon makes me unduly suspicious. Why do I see this statement (the Vaisnava will forgive but the dust of his lotus feet will not) as political propaganda. Am I just paranoid?
Any comments from anyone who is still more or less in Iskcon?
I don't know to what extent anyone could say I'm identified with ISKCON any more. Yadunandanapada has been asking me to comment on a survey he has, but I told him it certainly doesn't apply to me because it seems more concerned with the perceptions of those with a relationship with an ISKCON temple.(I told him that I could probably be most closely identified with Tripurari Maharaja's work.) However, based on my own experience, I can certainly understand your suspicion. 
My sense is that Vaishnava aparadha is a background issue for ISKCON, with matters addressing institutional loyalty in the foreground. I may be wrong, though, since my experience is somewhat limited, and I haven't spent much time around ISKCON in over three years.
Babhru Das - October 23, 2004 12:23 am
Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura draws upon this verse in his Madhurya Kadambini. Therein he discusses sadhu ninda (blaspheming devotees) in relation to anarthas arising from offenses to Nama Prabhu. The Thakura explains that maha bhagavatas do not take offense. However, should one who has offended a maha bhagavata think that because of this fact an offender does not need to approach the maha bhagavata’s feet for forgiveness, one should think again. Why? Because although maha bhagavatas do not take offense, the dust of their feet does hold offenders accountable. Thus the spirit behind this statement is that one who has offended a great soul must approach that soul for forgiveness. Don’t think otherwise.
Thank you, Maharaja. I like this very well; it makes the issue exceedingly clear.
Babhru wondered what one should do if the offended sadhu has already left the world? The answer is that one must approach his representative.
To the best of your knowledge, has ISKCON actually approached Govinda Maharaja, or even you, Narasingha Maharaja, or Paramadvaiti Maharaja, to really apologize for their offenses to Sridhar Maharaja? I know they issued a letter a few years ago, which didn't impress me at all, particularly since they still say offensive things in whispers. And I know they haven't really approached you or any of the others to apologize for the way they treated you so many years ago.
Vrindaranya Dasi - October 23, 2004 12:57 am
And I know they haven't really approached you or any of the others to apologize for the way they treated you so many years ago.
...and continue to treat him up to the present day.
Babhru Das - October 23, 2004 1:33 am
And I know they haven't really approached you or any of the others to apologize for the way they treated you so many years ago....and continue to treat him up to the present day.
Indeed! Let me do a little editing: . . . for the way they have treated you for so many years.
Swami - October 23, 2004 1:57 am
ISKCON has ever apologized to me for anything.
Nanda-tanuja Dasa - October 23, 2004 2:09 am
This dust represents the servants of the maha bhagavata who are fulfilling the Lord’s most cherished desire to serve his dear devotees...although maha bhagavatas do not take offense, the dust of their feet does hold offenders accountable.
Some people may read this as an invitation to be vindictive. Can you clarify this please?
Swami - October 23, 2004 3:18 am
This dust represents the servants of the maha bhagavata who are fulfilling the Lord’s most cherished desire to serve his dear devotees...although maha bhagavatas do not take offense, the dust of their feet does hold offenders accountable.Some people may read this as an invitation to be vindictive. Can you clarify this please?
Siva did not take offence, but Parvati held her father, Daksa, accountable. This is natural and appropriate in love. It does not mean that the disciple will never forgive the offender, but that he or she will hold the offender accountable. Thus the only course for the offender is to approach the devotee he offended and ask for forgiveness. When he does so, the dust of his feet is satisfied. As I mentioned, the offender is not allowed to think that because the devotee he offended has not acknowledged the offense he is off the hook. No. The dust of his feet has noticed on behalf of Krsna.
Anyone who takes this as a license to be vindictive has no idea what Gaudiya Vaisnavism is about.
Babhru Das - October 23, 2004 4:07 am
ISKCON has ever apologized to me for anything.
And I think this goes a long way in explaining ISKCON's problems.
Going back to Brahma's suggestion that such a quotation may be used politically in ISKCON, I find myself not only understanding his suspicion, but coming to share it. They may feel that criticizing ISKCON's leaders is a hard offense to fogive, but that criticizing sadhus outside is hardly an offense. (That may be a little harsh, I admit; I foundmyself enamored of the symmetry.) The only doubt is that it was used by Urmila, who sometimes (please note the qualification) seems to be one of the more reasonable voices there.
Babhru Das - October 23, 2004 4:56 pm
I asked Urmila for her sources, and she mentioned precisely those same passages we've discussed: 4th canto, Chaitanya Bhagavat, and Madhurya-kadambini.
Brahma Dasa - October 25, 2004 7:33 pm
I’m satisfied with the explanation and references. Most of all, Swami’s words here will make a nice sanga. What do you think should be the title? Any suggestions?
I hope we can hear more from Swami on the dust of the lotus feet. Perhaps explaining something of what it means to take the dust of the lotus feet on ones head. I was there when Sridhara Maharaja chuckled that it did not mean touching the feet but rather hearing from and serving the Vaisnava. However, in Mayapura and Vrndavana many of us have seen people touching the feet of sadhus or sprinkling dust from the footpaths on their head. In one case I saw a rather happy fellow sit behind the steps of the Mayapura temple sneaking a touch of every foot that walked by. Isn’t this expression of devotion an example of taking the dust as well? Isn’t there benefit from touching the feet of a sadhu in humility?
Otherwise I think the ghost of GBC offenses to Srila Sridhara Maharaja is still haunting me. Over the years I heard just about every kind of justification one could conjure up against hearing from Sridhara Maharaja. Until the GBC changes their policy against hearing from Sridhara Maharaja I think that they should be held accountable by the dust of his Lotus feet. I know that a couple of times GBC men came over and offered some sort of apology. But to me the apology was hollow because offensive rhetoric from the pulpit went on regardless. Also a couple of years ago there was a GBC resolution absolving Sridhara Maharaja of responsibility in the zonal guru fiasco but my feelings are that even though this was a step in the right direction that resolution remains hollow as long as Sridhara Maharaja’s books are banned in Iskcon. The same goes for Swami and his books as well. Any comments?
Babhru Das - October 25, 2004 8:55 pm
I’m satisfied with the explanation and references. Most of all, Swami’s words here will make a nice sanga. What do you think should be the title? Any suggestions?
I'm working on it . . .
Otherwise I think the ghost of GBC offenses to Srila Sridhara Maharaja is still haunting me. Over the years I heard just about every kind of justification one could conjure up against hearing from Sridhara Maharaja. Until the GBC changes their policy against hearing from Sridhara Maharaja I think that they should be held accountable by the dust of his Lotus feet. I know that a couple of times GBC men came over and offered some sort of apology. But to me the apology was hollow because offensive rhetoric from the pulpit went on regardless. Also a couple of years ago there was a GBC resolution absolving Sridhara Maharaja of responsibility in the zonal guru fiasco but my feelings are that even though this was a step in the right direction that resolution remains hollow as long as Sridhara Maharaja’s books are banned in Iskcon. The same goes for Swami and his books as well. Any comments?
Just a big ditto from the middle of the ocean. Although I never had the chance to meet Srila Sridhar Maharaja (it would have finished the gurukula in Honolulu I was working hard to maintain as a service to Srila Prabhupada, my Godbrothers and -sisters, and our kids), I was not satisfied with the official"apology." It wasn't enough. And did any of them personally approach Govinda Maharaja to deliver that half a loaf?
And I've griped plenty about banning Swami and his books. We know well, though, that many of ISKCON's leaders read and appreciate all of Tripurari Maharaja's writing. Among the notes of appreciation I received for the article I wrote last year was a strong note from one of ISKCON's GBC members who initiates disciples. And we have also seen many of our members here discouraged or banned from attending ISKCON programs once they accepted initiation from Swami. And there's my old gripe about the treatment he got when he visited the San Diego ISKCON temple in '99. I think one of the best things we can do is to represent Swami, Srila Prabhupada, and Sridhar Maharaja as effectively and honestly as we can.
NrsinghaDas - October 25, 2004 9:57 pm
I have wondered for some time as to what the spicific signifigance was of worshiping and serving the lotus feet of the devotees. So I thought about it and thought about it and started to get some idea as to what seemed to be the spirit behind it. First thing that I thought was that to appeal to anothers feet is clearly placing oneself in the position of inferiority , for instance if I walk up to some one and start a conversation by takeing thier hand that is friendly and maybe a little commanding, or if put my hand on some ones shoulder that is friendly or equal, or if put my hand on someones head that is to say I have some superior possision to them , but if I touch their feet that is a sign of my submission and then what to speak of if I take them on my head.And then further more I thought also we aspire to be servent of the servent and if we consider the hierarchy of the bodily structure then we see that the feet are the servents of the whole body. The feet actually hold a very humble possision, physically they are situated at the bottom and they also practically have no enjoying tendency of there own, instead they just assist the body in pursuing all kinds of enjoyment that hardly include them. So to actually sincerely desire the dust wich is like the refuse of the feet is a sign of great apprectation and submissioin to that personality.So wether it is done in spirit by hearing and serving or actually done physically, if the intention is right it seems then both will be appreciated .
However, in Mayapura and Vrndavana many of us have seen people touching the feet of sadhus or sprinkling dust from the footpaths on their head. In one case I saw a rather happy fellow sit behind the steps of the Mayapura temple sneaking a touch of every foot that walked by. Isn’t this expression of devotion an example of taking the dust as well? Isn’t there benefit from touching the feet of a sadhu in humility?
My feeling is that the spirit of a favorable service attitude is at the heart of feet touching. It is a stament of submission but if the person dosent want you to touch thier feet then to refrain is to actually "take the dust of thier feet".It seems that it sometimes is done jestfully or even mockingly, and I dont think that serves any purpose, then again if the devotee is really an advanced devotee it may still have effect regardless due to thier advancement simmilar to the benevolent effects of namabhasa even when chanted in jest.
Brahma Dasa - October 27, 2004 5:53 pm
Question: Having been enlightened on the dust topic, now my mind is wondering about offenses to non-maha-bhagavata devotees. I've seen a lot of this. Are they just getting their karmic due and so one should not interfere, especially considering that the offender is also practicing chanting, etc.? Does the fact that they do take offense disqualify them from being protected by Krishna? Their hatred of the offender adversely affects both. These interpersonal dealings that so much of my contemplation is about, play a great role in one's progress, for better or for worse...
Dear*****
Obviously the seriousness of the offense will very in proportion to a devotees standing in Krsna consciousness. One should honor all, but special respect is given to Vaisnavas, and that in accordance with their position on the ladder of spiritual realization. It is not always possible for a neophyte to ascertain the spiritual position of a particular Vaisnava so in general honor is given in proportion to the devotees rank and seniority. If one observes this protocol, and truly respects all those who are engaged in service to Krsna, it will be difficult to make an actual offense. Differences of opinion, personality clashes, or innocent mistakes in protocol do not constitute Vaisnava aparadha, and the fact that two devotees might not get along well together has more to do with their conditioning than it has to do with Vaisnava aparadha. In cases when devotees just don't get along there is no harm in them staying apart from one another but there is harm in 'hate' because hate and vindictiveness is what Vaisnava aparadha is all about.
Neophyte devotees because of their lack of spiritual standing are always criticizing one another. One should avoid this tendency because criticism can turn into hate. Hate becomes proportionally more serious to the degree that it becomes verbal and even more so when it is put into writing. Apart from an actual physical attack an offense in writing is the worst. By that I mean something written for public consumption, as on the internet. Indeed an offense in writing must be made up for by an apology in writing. In this case a verbal apology is not sufficient.
Vaisnava aparadha is not about mistakes, personality clashes or differences of opinion, it is about hate and vindictiveness. By virtue of spiritual knowledge one should avoid churning personality clashes or differences of opinion into hate. If this is not altogether possible Srila Sridhara Maharaja said that an affectionate service connection to a higher Vaisnava will protect one from offenses to lower Vaisnavas. Strong negative emotions like hate are often difficult to control but the association of a higher Vaisnava will keep this tendency in check because such association fosters spiritual advancement that takes one beyond negativity. One of the symptoms of an advanced Vaisnava is that he is devoid of the propensity to criticize others.
All the best, Brahma
Vrindaranya Dasi - October 27, 2004 11:03 pm
Dear Narasingha das,
I appreciated your analysis very much. Very insightful.
Ys,
Vrindaranya
Bijaya Kumara Das - October 30, 2004 6:40 am
I agree with Brahma.
To me "all problems will be solved" indicates that even the dust of his lotus feet will forgive an offender if that person surrenders to the Vaisnava. How could the dust remain unforgiving if both Krsna and the Vaisnava have forgiven the previous offender, who has now surrendered to the Vaisnava?
Maybe what they were trying to say is (until one asks forgiveness for the offense from the vaisnava) the vaisnavas dust and Krsna will protect the vaisnava.
Bijaya Kumara Das - October 30, 2004 7:05 am
step in the right direction that resolution remains hollow as long as Sridhara Maharaja’s books are banned in Iskcon. The same goes for Swami and his books as well. Any comments?
I agree Brahma.
What is this sanction against self realized devotees of His Divine Grace not being able to use their spiritual masters mission to spread their realizations as well as not promoting proper Vaisnava literature that is in line with Sadhu, Sanga and Shastra.
It is sort of Ritvik in behavior or am I wrong with this analogy?