Hridayananda Writes GBC

April 11, 2009
ISKCON Philadelphia

Dear GBC members,

Please accept my obeisance's. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I am writing in reference to this resolution passed by the GBC this year:

317. Action and Public Statements of Hridayananda Das Goswami

The GBC has carefully reviewed the recent action (giving blessings) and the public statements of Hridayananda Maharaja concerning homosexuality. These remain controversial and divisive in ISKCON, and the GBC does not endorse or support them.

Teaching obligations have kept Hridayananda Maharaja from attending the GBC meetings this year, so the GBC has not been able to discuss this issue with him. A GBC delegation will soon meet personally with him to discuss this issue and attempt to reach a common understanding.

In compliance with that resolution I have flown to Philadelphia and on April 11, 2009 met with H.H. Bir Krishna das Goswami and H.G. Ravindra Svarupa dasa, the GBC delegation.

We have a common understanding, which I had already expressed prior to the Mayapura GBC meetings, in a dialogue with some GBC members.

I am writing to reaffirm that I uphold the Krishna conscious principle that sexual union is for procreation within marriage, and that no spiritual leader should encourage or endorse any other form of sexual relation.

I regret that I acted and spoke in such a way as to give many an impression to the contrary. I am sorry.

Your servant,

Hridayananda dasa Goswami

http://www.dandavats.com/?p=7166

 

Technorati Tags: hrdayananda,iskcon,irm,humanrights,journalism,same sex,censorship,homeland security,political philosophy

ISKCON Bangalore Wins the Court Battle

BY: NIMAI PANDIT DAS

Apr 16, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK (SUN) — In breaking news on April 17th 2009, in the Trial Court of Bangalore the Judge finally passed an order in the matter of ISKCON Bangalore vs. ISKCON Mumbai. He ruled in favor of ISKCON Bangalore Society, giving it ownership to the Hare Krishna Hill and the famous temple atop it. He thereby once and for all put to rest all allegations of wrong doing or corrupt family dealings among the leadership of ISKCON Bangalore.

This ruling again reiterated the fact that ISKCON Bangalore, under the leadership of Sriman Madhu Pandit das, is on the path shown by Krishna, separate from the corrupt ISKCON Mumbai Society and its GBC leadership. This result will further enhance and deepen the quality of service of all the residents of Hare Krishna Hill to Sri Sri Radha Krishnacandra for the benefit of all humanity, without unnecessary influences.

This ruling is further proof that what Krishna promises in the Bhagavad-gita, that "My devotees will never perish", is a hundred percent true even though we may not know His workings most of the time.

Thanks goes to devotees worldwide who stood by the ISKCON Bangalore devotees in their decade long struggle to reinstate Srila Prabhupada in the center of ISKCON in spite of severe hardships.

A message to HH Radhanath Swami, HH Jayaptaka Swami, HH Gopal Krishna Goswami and HH Bhakti Caru Swami:

Please take this result, which has come in spite of immense funds sacrificed by you all (to the tune of many millions of dollars) and repeated confidential assurances by Doyaram das, as Lord Krishna's indication that NO ONE CAN DISTURB THE SERVICES OF HIS SINCERE SERVANTS. Hence please desist from further prolonging the case in Bangalore or supporting the dirty cause of Varada Krishna das, who is trashing devotees in a tabloid manner through some websites.

Please call for an end to all hostilities being undertaken by means of your underlings in Bangalore, and let us concentrate on preaching in our own areas and services given to us by Srila Prabhupada. Only pure devotional service rendered for the benefit of the conditioned souls will help us at the time of fast approaching death. Let us preach by our own strengths depending on Srila Prabhupada and Krishna, and then LET THE RESULTS SPEAK.

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/04-09/editorials4386.htm

 

IceRocket Tags: IRM,prabhupadanuga,iskcon,ritvik,political philosophy,censorship,clergy abuse,jayapataka,interfaith,journalism,reformation

Bhakti Vikasa and Hridayananda

Letter to the GBC
BY: HH HRIDAYANANDA DASA GOSWAMI
Apr 15, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, USA (SUN) —
ISKCON Philadelphia

Dear GBC members,

Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I am writing in reference to this resolution passed by the GBC this year:
317. Action and Public Statements of Hridayananda Das Goswami
The GBC has carefully reviewed the recent action (giving blessings) and the public statements of Hridayananda Maharaja concerning homosexuality. These remain controversial and divisive in ISKCON, and the GBC does not endorse or support them.
Teaching obligations have kept Hridayananda Maharaja from attending the GBC meetings this year, so the GBC has not been able to discuss this issue with him. A GBC delegation will soon meet personally with him to discuss this issue and attempt to reach a common understanding.

In compliance with that resolution I have flown to Philadelphia and on April 11, 2009 met with H.H. Bir Krishna das Goswami and H.G. Ravindra Svarupa dasa, the GBC delegation.

We have a common understanding, which I had already expressed prior to the Mayapura GBC meetings, in a dialogue with some GBC members.

I am writing to reaffirm that I uphold the Krishna conscious principle that sexual union is for procreation within marriage, and that no spiritual leader should encourage or endorse any other form of sexual relation.

I regret that I acted and spoke in such a way as to give many an impression to the contrary. I am sorry.

Your servant,
Hridayananda dasa Goswami

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/04-09/editorials4383.htm

All the Trappings of a Gay Marriage
BY: HH BHAKTI VIKASA SWAMI
Apr 15, INDIA (SUN) —

Dear Hridayananda Maharaja, Please accept my obeisances. Jaya Srila Prabhupada. Thank you for your reply.

> > 1 Earlier this year, it became public that you had "blessed" a "gay
> > union." 2 The "gay union" you "blessed" had all the trappings of a
> > religious marriage: a ceremony conducted by a religious minister at a
> > religious venue (in this case, a preaching center overseen by yourself)
> > in which two persons (in your words) "commit themselves to each other."
> > Relatives and friends were invited. The blessings of God were invoked on
> > the couple. The event was reported in a magazine (in this case, Chakra)
> > that covers the affairs of the concerned religious institution.
>
> A few minor corrections: The event did not take place at an ISKCON
> facility.

However that the event was presented and seen as an ISKCON event is clear from the following:
"One hundred family members, friends and ISKCON devotees celebrated... Santa Barbara ISKCON temple president Sarvatma das officiated. Govinda's of Los Angeles served prasad. H.H. Hridayananda das Goswami conferred this blessing"

Does the fact that the event did not take place at an ISKCON facility make a significant difference to what transpired?

> It did not have 'all the trappings,'

As mentioned above, it certainly had "many" of the trappings of a religious marriage. According to the description on Chakra, those in attendance, unless specifically informed otherwise, presumably would have understood that the event was to solemnize what was tantamount to what has come to be known as a "gay marriage."

> especially not a marriage vow

The report stated that they "committed to a loving relationship at a Blessing Ceremony." In other words, the crux of the ceremony was your blessing -- in which you specified that "they commit themselves to each other." What is the nature of that commitment that makes it radically different from a "marriage vow" between gays -- that you profess to disfavor?

> the event was not reported in an ISKCON publication

True; Chakra is not an official ISKCON publication. It is a pro-gay site that reports almost exclusively on ISKCON and clearly intends to influence attitudes and policies in ISKCON, and which has for years prominently voiced your opinions, which are in tandem with its propaganda.

By pointing out that the event did not take place at an ISKCON facility and was not reported in an ISKCON publication, you have stressed that this was not an official ISKCON event. Why have you stressed the unofficial nature of this event, and what significant difference do you feel that this makes to what transpired and your leading role in it?

You are of course fully aware that as an ISKCON sannyasi, guru, and GBC member, all your actions, especially formal public actions, are liable to be considered representative of and endorsed by ISKCON, and fully in line with Srila Prabhupada and the parampara.

> It was not my idea to publish the report, and I had no knowledge a picture
> would be posted.

If you would have known that a report with a picture was going to be posted, would you have acted differently, and if so why?

> > Of course, the outstanding difference between this and a traditional
> religious
> > marriage was that the "union" was between two males: Joshua Norman
> > Einhorn and Stanley Earl Harris.
>
> A further 'outstanding difference' is that they chose not to marry, and
> did not make a marriage vow.

Their becoming "committed to a loving relationship" was meant to be solemnized by the "Blessing Ceremony." If not, then what was the purpose of the ceremony and what was it that "one hundred family members, friends and ISKCON devotees celebrated"? And what is the crucial difference between a a marriage vow and a religiously sanctified "committ[ment] to a loving relationship"?

> For the last few years, I have not 'so strongly endorsed and defended' gay
> unions.

Please explain how your "blessing" of a gay couple's becoming "committed to a loving relationship" is not "serious, formal and public recognition and appreciation" of and not a strong endorsement of "gay unions."

> By your logic, Prabhupada 'strongly endorsed and defended' meat
> eating since he many times urged people that could not or would not give
> up meat to eat a less important animal and not the cow.
> I spoke of a gay mongamous commitment precisely in the way that
> Prabhupada spoke of eating the flesh of less important animals.

A crucial difference is that Srila Prabhupada never advocated or practiced that Vaisnavas should bless meat-eating, nor hold a formal religious ceremony in celebration of it. Your blessing a "gay union," and its celebration by persons reported to be Vaisnavas, gives an aura of religious sanctity to homosexuality, the tendency toward which our founder-acarya describes as "demoniac" and the act of which Manu describes as sinful.

To encourage grossly sinful people to eat chicken rather than beef, or to stick to one homosexual partner rather than flitting around, should be accompanied by making it clear that such activities, although an improvement, are still inherently sinful and punishable by the laws of nature, and have to be given up if one is serious to attain the ultimate goal of life, pure love of Krsna.

But you have extolled Stanley Harris and Joshua Einhorn's "true love for each other," "such true spiritual love," as "in the spirit of God's love for them" and "blessed" them that "their relationship lead them ... back to our real home in the spiritual world." However that "love," that relationship, is homosexual, which our sacred authorities describe as demoniac and sinful; nowhere in sastra is it stated that homosexuality can lead to the spiritual world.

This topic remains "controversial and divisive": you clearly feel your actions to be in the best interests of ISKCON, whereas others feel that your actions are seriously flawed. As this issue deserves to be intelligently scrutinized and understood by the broader body of devotees, who it certainly affects, I am forwarding these texts beyond this conference, thus also affording you further opportunities to clarify your perspective. Clear, unambiguous responses to my points (given above) would be appreciated.

Hoping this meets you well,
your servant,
Bhakti Vikasa Swami

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/04-09/editorials4384.htm

Technorati Tags: marriage,bhakti vikasa,hrdayananda,prabhupadanuga,iskcon,humanrights,social science,psychology,homeland security,censorship,morality

Bhakti Vikasa Requests Clarification Between Gay Union and Gay Marriage

Bhakti Vikasa Maharaj

Hridayananda Maharaj

Submitted by krishna-kirti on Sat, 04/11/2009 - 16:32.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

New Text 48304 (59 lines)
From: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date: 11-Apr-09 10:48 -0400
To: Tridandi Sannyasa
Subject: "gay marriage" and "gay union" -- what is the difference?
------------------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Answer 48300 (47 lines)
From: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date: 11-Apr-09 10:45 -0400
To: Hridayananda Dasa Goswami
Reference: Text PAMHO:17289512 by Hridayananda Dasa Goswami
Subject: "gay marriage" and "gay union" -- what is the difference?
------------------------------------------------------------

Sri Sri Guru Gaurangau Jayatah

Dear Hridayananda Maharaja,

Dandavat.

Four years ago, you publically announced that it was in ISKCON's best interests to offer "serious, formal and public recognition and appreciation" for "gay monogamy."1 Earlier this year, it became public that you had "blessed" a "gay union."2

The "gay union" you "blessed" had all the trappings of a religious marriage: a ceremony conducted by a religious minister at a religious venue (in this case, a preaching center overseen by yourself) in which two persons (in your words) "commit themselves to each other." Relatives and friends were invited. The blessings of God were invoked on the couple. The event was reported in a magazine (in this case, Chakra) that covers the affairs of the concerned religious institution.

Of course, the outstanding difference between this and a traditional religious marriage was that the "union" was between two males: Joshua Norman Einhorn and Stanley Earl Harris.

In an email of 5 April 2009, sent to multiple receivers and conferences, you wrote:

"I have repeatedly clarified that I am not in favor of gay marriage."

Maharaja, it is not clear to me, so kindly clarify once more: what is the significant difference between "gay union" of the type that you so strongly endorse and defend, and "gay marriage," which you disfavor? What is the crucial factor that makes them so markedly different as to evoke your wholly different attitude toward them?

dasa, Bhakti Vikasa Swami

=====================================================

Footnotes:

1. "Vaisnava Moral Theology and Homosexuality" Hridayananda Goswami - http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/dandavats/homosexuality.pdf
You have written: "I have repeatedly clarified that I am not in favor of gay marriage."

2. "Hridayananda Das Goswami Blesses Gay Male Couple"
http://chakra.org/announcements/persFeb01_09.html

(Text 48300) -----------------------------------------------

------- End of Forwarded Message ------
(Text 48304) -----------------------------------------------

Bhakkti Vikasa Petitions GBC

Submitted by krishna-kirti on Sat, 04/11/2009 - 16:27.

---------- Forwarded Message ----------

Comment 48301 (6 lines)
From:      Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date:      11-Apr-09 10:06 -0400
To:        Hridayananda Dasa Goswami
To:        Tridandi Sannyasa
Reference: Text PAMHO:17289512 by Hridayananda Dasa Goswami
Subject:   From the GBC resolutions
------------------------------------------------------------

For the benefit and clarification of the worldwide body of devotees, I request the GBC (via the GBC members on this conference) to make a clear statement of whether or not "gay unions," "gay monogamy," or "gay marriage" may under any circumstance be allowed within ISKCON or by ISKCON members (and if so under which circumstances), and whether or not it is acceptable that an ISKCON leader bless or publicly approve such unions.

------- End of Forwarded Message ------

http://www.siddhanta.com/

Technorati Tags: Bhaktivinoda,Bhakti Vikasa,ISKCON,ritvik,humanrights,gay marriage,political philosophy,social science,censorship,homeland security

Mukunda Mala Stotra

TEXT 6

divi va bhuvi va mamastu vaso
narake va narakantaka prakamam
avadhirita-saradaravindau
caranau te marane 'pi cintayami

SYNONYMS

divi--in the abode of the demigods; va--or; bhuvi--on the earth, the home of human beings; va--or; mama--my; astu--may be; vasah--residence; narake--in hell; va--or; naraka-antaka--O killer of the demon Naraka; prakamam--however You desire; avadhirita--which have defied; sarada--of the fall season; aravindau--the lotus flowers; caranau--the two feet; te--Your; marane--at the time of death; api--even; cintayami--may I remember.

TRANSLATION

O Lord, killer of the demon Naraka! Let me reside either in the realm of the demigods, in the world of human beings, or in hell, as You please. I pray only that at the point of death I may remember Your two lotus feet, whose beauty defies that of the lotus growing in the Sarat season.

PURPORT

As stated before, a pure devotee of the Lord has nothing to do with mundane religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, or salvation, nor is he concerned whether his standard of material existence is the highest or the lowest. To him, heaven and hell are of equal value. He is not afraid of going to hell for the service of the Lord, nor is he glad to live in heaven without the service of the Lord. In any circumstance his consciousness is fixed on the Lord's lotus feet, whose beauty defies the most beautiful lotus flower of the mundane world.

The defiance is due to the transcendental position of the Lord's form, name, qualities, pastimes, and so on. The sruti mantras declare that although the Lord has no hands He can accept anything we offer Him with devotion, although He has no feet He can travel anywhere, and although He has no mundane eyes He can see anywhere and everywhere without hindrance. The Brahma-samhita describes each of His senses as omnipotent. The mundane eye can see but not hear, but His eyes can see, hear, eat, generate offspring, and so on. The sruti mantras say that He impregnates material nature with the seeds of living beings simply by casting His glance at her. He does not need any other kind of intercourse with mother nature to beget the living beings in her womb and become their father.

Therefore any relationship the Lord has with His many devotees--whether fatherhood, sonhood, or any other--is not at all material. The Lord is pure spirit, and only when the living being is in his pure spiritual state can he have all sorts of relationships with Him. Philosophers with a poor fund of knowledge cannot conceive of these positive spiritual relationships between the Lord and the all-spiritual living beings, and thus they simply think in terms of negating material relationships. In this way such philosophers naturally adopt the concept of impersonalism.

By contrast, a pure devotee like King Kulasekhara has complete knowledge of both matter and spirit. He does not say that everything material is false, yet he has nothing to do with anything material, from heaven down to hell. He fully understands the statement in the Bhagavad-gita that from the lowest planets up to Brahmaloka, the highest planet in the universe, there is no spiritual bliss, which the living beings hanker for. Therefore the pure devotee, being in full knowledge of spiritual life, simultaneously rejects material relationships and cultivates his spiritual relationship with the Lord. In other words, the spiritual knowledge a devotee possesses not only allows him to reject material existence, but it also provides him with an understanding of the reality of positive, eternal spiritual existence. This is the understanding King Kulasekhara expresses in this prayer.

Technorati Tags: Prabhupada,IRM,Iskcon,ritivk,prabhupadanuga,censorship,political philosophy

Mukunda Mala Stotra

SUTRA 5
TEXT
nastha dharme na vasu-nicaye naiva kamopabhoge
yad bhavyam tad bhavatu bhagavan purva-karmanurupam
etat prarthyam mama bahu matam janma-janmantare 'pi
tvat-padambhoruha-yuga-gata niscala bhaktir astu
SYNONYMS

na--not; astha--special regard; dharme--for religiosity; na--nor; vasu--of wealth; nicaye--for the accumulation; na eva--nor even; kama-upabhoge--for sense enjoyment; yat--whatever; bhavyam--inevitable; tat--that; bhavatu--let it happen; bhagavan--O Lord; purva--previous; karma--my deeds; anurupam--according to; etat--this; prarthyam--to be requested; mama--by me; bahu matam--most desirable; janma-janma--birth after birth; antare--during; api--even; tvat--Your; pada-amboruha--of lotus feet; yuga--in the pair; gata--resting; niscala--unflinching; bhaktih--devotion; astu--may there be.

TRANSLATION

O my Lord! I have no attachment for religiosity, or for accumulating wealth, or for enjoying sense gratification. Let these come as they inevitably must, in accordance with my past deeds. But I do pray for this most cherished boon: birth after birth, let me render unflinching devotional service unto Your two lotus feet.

PURPORT

Human beings advance toward God consciousness when they go beyond the gross materialistic life of eating, sleeping, fearing, and mating and begin to develop moral and ethical principles. These principles develop further into religious consciousness, leading to an imaginary conception of God without any practical realization of the truth. These stages of God consciousness are called religiosity, which promises material prosperity of various degrees.

People who develop this conception of religiosity perform sacrifices, give in charity, and undergo different types of austerity and penance, all with a view toward being rewarded with material prosperity. The ultimate goal of such so-called religious people is sense gratification of various kinds. For sense gratification, material prosperity is necessary, and therefore they perform religious rituals with a view toward the resultant material name, fame, and gain.

But genuine religion is different. In Sanskrit such genuine religion is called dharma, which means "the essential quality of the living being." The sastras say that this essential quality is to render eternal service, and the proper object of this service is the Supreme Truth, Lord Krsna, the Absolute Personality of Godhead. This eternal, transcendental service of the Lord is misdirected under material conditions and takes the shape of (1) the aforementioned religiosity, (2) economic development, (3) sense gratification, and (4) salvation, or the attempt to negate all material variegatedness out of frustration.

Genuine religion, however, does not culminate in either economic development, sense gratification, or salvation. The perfection of religion is to attain complete satisfaction of the spirit soul, and this is accomplished by rendering devotional service to the Lord, who is beyond the perception of the material senses. When the living being directs his eternal service attitude toward the eternal Supreme Being, such service can never be hampered by any sort of material hindrance. Such transcendental service is above even salvation, and therefore it certainly does not aim at any kind of material reward in the shape of name, fame, or gain.

One who engages in the transcendental loving service of the Supreme Being automatically attains detachment from material name, fame, and gain, which are aspired for only by those who do not understand that this name, fame, and gain are merely shadows of the real thing. Material name, fame, and gain are only perverted reflections of the substance--the name, fame, and opulences of the Lord. Therefore the pure devotee of Lord Vasudeva, enlightened by the transcendental service attitude, has no attraction for such false things as religiosity, economic development, sense gratification, or salvation, the last snare of Maya.

The purpose of performing real religion is to attain attachment for hearing and chanting the messages of the kingdom of God. Materialistic people are attached to ordinary newspapers on account of their lack of spiritual consciousness. Real religion develops this spiritual consciousness and also attachment for the messages of God, without which all labor in the performance of religious rites is only a waste of energy.

Therefore one should not practice religion with the aim of improving one's economic welfare, nor should one use one's wealth for sense gratification, nor should the frustration of one's plans for sense gratification lead one to aspire for salvation, or liberation from material conditions. Instead of indulging in sense gratification of different grades with the fruits of one's labor, one should work just to maintain the body and soul together, with the aim of inquiring into the ultimate aims and objects of life. In other words, one should inquire into the Absolute Truth.

The Absolute Truth is realized in three phases, namely, the impersonal Brahman, the localized Paramatma, and the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A person who attains the highest stage of spiritual realization--realization of the Supreme Personality of Godhead--automatically prays as King Kulasekhara does here.

Only one who renders devotional service to the Lord can attain this stage of indifference to the false and temporary assets of material nature. Such devotional service is not a mental concoction of depraved persons but is an actual process of God realization characterized by full cognizance and detachment and based on the Vedic literature. So-called devotional practices that have no reference to the rules and regulations set down in such books of Vedic literature as the sruti, the smrti, the Puranas, and the Pancaratras are not bona fide. The self-realized souls advise us to reject such pseudodevotional practices, which simply create a disturbance on the path of spiritual realization. Only by sincerely engaging in the service of the Lord according to the injunctions of scripture can one gradually become a qualified devotee of the Lord, and it does not matter whether it takes many repetitions of birth and death, life after life.

Mukunda-mala-stotra

SUTRA 4
TEXT

naham vande tava caranayor dvandvam advandva-hetoh
kumbhipakam gurum api hare narakam napanetum
ramya-rama-mrdu-tanu-lata nandane napi rantum
bhave bhave hrdaya-bhavane bhavayeyam bhavantam


SYNONYMS

na--not; aham--I; vande--pray; tava--Your; caranayoh--of the lotus feet; dvandvam--to the pair; advandva--of release from duality; hetoh--for the reason; kumbhipakam--the planet of boiling oil; gurum--most severe; api--either; hare--O Hari; narakam--hell; na--not; apanetum--to avoid; ramya--very beautiful; rama--of the fair sex; mrdu--soft; tanu-lata--of creeperlike bodies; nandane--in the pleasure gardens of heaven; na api--nor; rantum--to enjoy; bhave bhave--in various rebirths; hrdaya--of my heart; bhavane--within the house; bhavayeyam--may I concentrate; bhavantam--on You.

TRANSLATION

O Lord Hari, it is not to be saved from the dualities of material existence or the grim tribulations of the Kumbhipaka hell that I pray to Your lotus feet. Nor is my purpose to enjoy the soft-skinned beautiful women who reside in the gardens of heaven. I pray to Your lotus feet only so that I may remember You alone in the core of my heart, birth after birth.

PURPORT

There are two classes of men: the atheists and the theists. The atheists have no faith in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, while the theists have various degrees of faith in Him.

The atheists are faithless on account of their many misdeeds in their present and past lives. They fall into four categories: (1) the gross materialists, (2) the immoral sinners, (3) the number-one fools, and (4) those who are bewildered by maya despite their mundane erudition. No one among these four classes of atheist ever believes in the Supreme Personality of Godhead, what to speak of offering prayers unto His lotus feet.

The theists, on the other hand, have faith in the Lord and pray to Him with various motives. One attains such a theistic life not by chance but as a result of performing many pious acts in both the present life and the past life. Such pious men also belong to four categories: (1) the needy, (2) those who have fallen into difficulty, (3) those who are inquisitive about the transcendental science, and (4) the genuine philosophers. The philosophers and those who are inquisitive are better than those in categories (1) and (2). But a pure devotee is far above these four classes of pious men, for he is in the transcendental position.

The needy pious man prays to God for a better standard of life, and the pious man who has fallen into material difficulty prays in order to get rid of his trouble. But the inquisitive man and the philosopher do not pray to God for amelioration of mundane problems. They pray for the ability to know Him as He is, and they try to reach Him through science and logic. Such pious men are generally known as theosophists.

Needy pious men pray to God to improve their economic condition because all they know is sense gratification, while those in difficulty ask Him to free them from a hellish life of tribulations. Such ignorant people do not know the value of human life. This life is meant to prepare one to return to the absolute world, the kingdom of God.

A pure devotee is neither a needy man, a man fallen into difficulty, nor an empiric philosopher who tries to approach the Divinity on the strength his own imperfect knowledge. A pure devotee receives knowledge of the Divinity from the right source--the disciplic succession of realized souls who have followed strictly the disciplinary method of devotional service under the guidance of bona fide spiritual masters. It is not possible to know the transcendental nature of the Divinity by dint of one's imperfect sense perception, but the Divinity reveals Himself to a pure devotee in proportion to the transcendental service rendered unto Him.

King Kulasekhara is a pure devotee, and as such he is not eager to improve himself by the standards of the empiric philosophers, distressed men, or fruitive workers of this world. Pious acts may lead a mundane creature toward the path of spiritual realization, but practical activity in the domain of devotional service to the Lord need not wait for the reactions of pious acts. A pure devotee does not think in terms of his personal gain or loss because he is fully surrendered to the Lord. He is concerned only with the service of the Lord and always engages in that service, and for this reason his heart is the Lord's home. The Lord being absolute, there is no difference between Him and His service. A pure devotee's heart is always filled with ideas about executing the Lord's service, which is bestowed upon the pure devotee through the transparent medium of the spiritual master.

The spiritual master in the authoritative line of disciplic succession is the "son of God," or in other words the Lord's bona fide representative. The proof that he is bona fide is his invincible faith in God, which protects him from the calamity of impersonalism. An impersonalist cannot be a bona fide spiritual master, for such a spiritual master's only purpose in life must be to render service to the Lord. He preaches the message of Godhead as the Lord's appointed agent and has nothing to do with sense gratification or the mundane wrangling of the impersonalists. No one can render devotional service to an impersonal entity because such service implies a reciprocal personal relationship between the servant and the master. In the impersonal school the so-called devotee is supposed to merge with the Lord and lose his separate existence.

Pure devotees like King Kulasekhara are particularly careful to avoid a process that will end in their becoming one with the existence of the Lord, a state known as advandva, nonduality. This is simply spiritual suicide. Out of the five kinds of salvation, advandva is the most abominable for a devotee. A pure devotee denounces such oneness with the Lord as worse than going to hell.

As His separated expansions, the living beings are part and parcel of the Lord. The Lord expands Himself into plenary parts and separated parts to enjoy transcendental pastimes, and if a living being refuses to engage in these transcendental blissful pastimes, he is at liberty to merge into the Absolute. This is something like a son's committing suicide instead of living with his father according to the rules the father sets down. By committing suicide, the son thus sacrifices the happiness he could have enjoyed by engaging in a filial loving relationship with his father and enjoying his father's estate. A pure devotee persistently avoids such a criminal policy, and King Kulasekhara is guiding us to avoid this pitfall.

The king also says that the reason he is praying to the Lord is not to be saved from the Kumbhipaka hell. Laborers in gigantic iron and steel mills suffer tribulations similar to those in the Kumbhipaka hell. Kumbhi means "pot," and paka means "boiling." So if a person were put into a pot of oil and the pot were set to boiling, he would have some idea of the suffering in Kumbhipaka hell.

There are innumerable hellish engagements in the modern so-called civilization, and by the grace of the Lord's illusory energy people think these hellish engagements are a great fortune. Modern industrial factories fully equipped with up-to-date machines are so many Kumbhipaka hells, and the organizers of these enterprises regard them as indispensable for the advancement of economic welfare. The mass of laborers exploited by the organizers directly experience the "welfare" conditions in these factories, but what the organizers do not know is that by the law of karma they will in due time become laborers in similar Kumbhipaka hells.

Intelligent persons certainly want to be saved from such Kumbhipaka hells, and they pray to God for this benediction. But a pure devotee does not pray in this way. A pure devotee of Narayana looks equally upon the happiness enjoyed in heaven, the transcendental bliss of becoming one with the Lord, and the tribulations experienced in the Kumbhipaka hell. He is not concerned with any of them because he is always engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. By the grace of the Lord, even in the Kumbhipaka hell a pure devotee can adjust the situation and turn it into Vaikuntha.

The Bhagavad-gita and all other revealed scriptures say that the Lord accompanies every living being in His localized aspect of Paramatma, the Supersoul. Therefore even a living being destined to reside in the Kumbhipaka hell is accompanied by his eternal companion, the Lord. But by His inconceivable power the Lord remains aloof from these hellish circumstances, just as the sky remains separate from the air although seemingly mixed with it.

Similarly, the pure devotee of the Lord does not live anywhere in this material world, although He appears to live among mundane creatures. Actually, the devotee lives in Vaikuntha. In this way the Supreme Lord bestows upon His pure devotee the inconceivable power that allows him to stay aloof from all mundane circumstances and reside eternally in the spiritual world. The devotee does not want this power consciously or unconsciously, but the Lord is careful about His devotee, just as a mother is always careful about her little child, who is completely dependent on her care.

A pure devotee like King Kulasekhara refuses to associate with beautiful soft-skinned women. There are different grades of women on different planets in the universe. Even on the earth there are different types of women who are enjoyed by different types of men. But on higher planets there are women many, many millions of times more beautiful than the women on this planet, and there are also many pleasure abodes where they can be enjoyed. The best of all of these is the Nandana Gardens on Svargaloka. In the Nandana Gardens--a "Garden of Eden"--those who are qualified can enjoy varieties of beautiful women called Apsaras. The demigods generally enjoy the company of the Apsaras in the same way that the great Mogul kings and nawabs enjoyed their harems. But these kings and nawabs are like straw before the demigods of Svargaloka, which lies in the third stratum of the universe.

The inner tendency to enjoy is in the core of every living being's heart. But in the diseased state of material existence the living being misuses that tendency. The more he increases this diseased, conditioned state, the longer he extends his period of material existence. The sastras advise, therefore, that a living entity should accept only those sense-enjoyable objects necessary for the upkeep of the material body and reject those that are just for sense gratification. In this way he will reduce the tendency for sense enjoyment. This restraint cannot be imposed by force; it must be voluntary.

Such restraint automatically develops in the course of one's executing devotional service. Thus one who is already engaged in devotional service need not restrain his senses artificially. A pure devotee like King Kulasekhara, therefore, neither desires sense enjoyment nor exerts himself to restrain his senses; rather, he tries only to engage himself in the transcendental loving service of the Lord, without any stop.